A systematic review of the relationship between subchondral bone features, pain and structural pathology in peripheral joint osteoarthritis

Andrew J. Barr; T. Mark Campbell; Devan Hopkinson; Sarah R. Kingsbury; Mike A. Bowes; Philip G. Conaghan

doi:10.1186/s13075-015-0735-x

Research article
Open Access

A systematic review of the relationship between subchondral bone features, pain and structural pathology in peripheral joint osteoarthritis

Andrew J. Barr¹,
T. Mark Campbell^{1, 2},
Devan Hopkinson³,
Sarah R. Kingsbury¹,
Mike A. Bowes³ and
Philip G. Conaghan¹Email author

Arthritis Research & Therapy201517:228

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13075-015-0735-x

Received: 22 December 2014
Accepted: 3 August 2015
Published: 25 August 2015

Abstract

Introduction

Bone is an integral part of the osteoarthritis (OA) process. We conducted a systematic literature review in order to understand the relationship between non-conventional radiographic imaging of subchondral bone, pain, structural pathology and joint replacement in peripheral joint OA.

Methods

A search of the Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases was performed for original articles reporting association between non-conventional radiographic imaging-assessed subchondral bone pathologies and joint replacement, pain or structural progression in knee, hip, hand, ankle and foot OA. Each association was qualitatively characterised by a synthesis of the data from each analysis based upon study design, adequacy of covariate adjustment and quality scoring.

Results

In total 2456 abstracts were screened and 139 papers were included (70 cross-sectional, 71 longitudinal analyses; 116 knee, 15 hip, six hand, two ankle and involved 113 MRI, eight DXA, four CT, eight scintigraphic and eight 2D shape analyses). BMLs, osteophytes and bone shape were independently associated with structural progression or joint replacement. BMLs and bone shape were independently associated with longitudinal change in pain and incident frequent knee pain respectively.

Conclusion

Subchondral bone features have independent associations with structural progression, pain and joint replacement in peripheral OA in the hip and hand but especially in the knee. For peripheral OA sites other than the knee, there are fewer associations and independent associations of bone pathologies with these important OA outcomes which may reflect fewer studies; for example the foot and ankle were poorly studied. Subchondral OA bone appears to be a relevant therapeutic target.

Systematic review

PROSPERO registration number: CRD 42013005009

Keywords

Subchondral Bone
Total Knee Replacement
Bone Cyst
Bone Marrow Lesion
Bone Feature

Introduction

Osteoarthritis (OA), the most common form of arthritis, is a major cause of chronic pain and disability. OA confers a huge burden on both individuals and health economies [1, 2]. There are currently no licensed disease-modifying osteoarthritis drugs (DMOADs) but ideally these should both inhibit structural progression and improve symptoms and/or function [3, 4]. While hyaline cartilage loss is the hallmark pathology, clinical OA usually involves multiple tissues. Describing the relationships of these tissues with structural progression and symptoms may identify potential tissue targets.

The subchondral bone in particular is intimately associated with hyaline cartilage and therefore a tissue of great potential interest. Conventional radiographs are known to be relatively insensitive to the structural features of OA [5], in part because they do not assess three-dimensional (3D) bone structure [6]. A number of non-conventional radiographic imaging modalities accurately demonstrate in vivo subchondral bone pathological changes, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), scintigraphy and positron emission tomography (PET) [5, 7–13]. Hunter and colleagues found a moderate association between bone marrow lesions (BMLs), structural progression and longitudinal change in pain in a systematic review focused on MRI biomarkers and knee OA [7]. In another systematic review Kloppenburg and colleagues examined associations between MRI features and knee pain, but not structural pathology [14].

We therefore wished to comprehensively review the literature on subchondral bone structure assessed with all non-conventional radiographic imaging modalities, examining the common sites of peripheral OA and describing the relationships between imaging-detected subchondral bone features and joint replacement, structural progression and pain.

Methods

Systematic literature search

A systematic literature search of Medline (from 1950), EMBASE (from 1980) and the Cochrane library databases until September 2014 was performed. A full description of the search terms used is recorded in Additional file 1: Table S1. An abbreviation of the full search terms used was ‘knee, hip, hand, foot and ankle’ and ‘osteoarthritis’ and ‘subchondral bone’ manifestations of OA (‘bone marrow lesion’, ‘osteophyte’, ‘bone cyst’, ‘bone area’, ‘bone shape’, ‘bone attrition’, bone morphometry and mineral density) and ‘MRI’ or ‘CT’ or ‘DXA’ or ‘scintigraphy’ or ‘PET’. The search term ‘bone shape’ was not restricted to non-conventional radiographic imaging. The final search was restricted to humans. There was no language restriction and abstracts were not excluded. Exclusion criteria are listed in Fig. 1. Any analysis of fewer than 20 patients with confirmed OA was excluded to remove papers at risk of study imprecision. The inclusion criteria were in vivo observational studies of a human population with clinical and/or radiographic OA, which included an imaging description of the adjacent subchondral bone pathology to the osteoarthritic joint and the relationship of this with pain, structural progression or joint replacement. Analyses describing the relationship between OA bone manifestations and structural severity (cross-sectional) or progression (prospective cohorts) in populations without clinical and radiographic OA were included to incorporate early structural features of joint degeneration. The outcome measures of structural severity or progression included cartilage defects, cartilage thickness, cartilage volume, denuded subchondral bone, Kellgren-Lawrence (KL)grade, joint space width and joint space narrowing. Other outcome measures included joint replacement and any pain measures.

Fig. 1
Search strategy results and article exclusion. *Two articles included both cross-sectional and longitudinal data. Longitudinal data included 16 case–control studies and 55 cohort studies

The articles identified by the preliminary search were screened by two reviewers (DH, AB) for relevance and for references not identified by the preliminary search, although no additional citations were found. Discordance in opinion was resolved by a third reviewer (SK). We applied the methods for reporting meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology that are recommended by the Cochrane collaboration [15, 16].

Data extraction

Data extraction was performed by two reviewers (DH, AB) as described in the Supplementary methods ‘data extraction’ (see Additional file 1).

Quality assessment

The quality of each observational study was independently assessed by two reviewers (TC, AB), as described in Supplementary methods ‘Quality assessment’ (see Additional file 1).

Best evidence synthesis

Statistical pooling of the data was considered inappropriate in light of the heterogeneous study populations, methodological quality and bone feature or outcome measurements for OA. Therefore a qualitative summary of the evidence for each bone feature (e.g., BML) and its association with pain or structural progression and joint replacement was provided based on the study design, adequacy of adjustment for confounders (age, body mass index and gender) and quality score as described in the Supplementary methods ‘Best evidence synthesis’ (see Additional file 1).

Studies that investigated the association between multiple bone features and OA pain or structural progression outcomes were considered as a single study for each bone feature. Included studies that established significant correlation between bone and pain, structural progression or joint replacement were described as positive (+) or negative (−) accordingly. If no association or inconclusive findings were described this was reported as no association (NA) or no conclusion (NC) respectively.

Results

Systematic literature search and selection

The Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) diagram in Fig. 1 describes the literature flow. Following exclusion of duplicates and triplicates, 2,456 articles met the search criteria. After applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 139 articles were included for data extraction and quality scoring. In total, 71 papers provided longitudinal data (55 cohorts, 16 case−controls), 70 provided cross-sectional data, and two papers provided both.

Data extraction from selected studies

In only 12 studies did the mean age fall below 50 years [17–29]. Most (n = 93) described both genders; 2 studies included men only [27, 30], 14 studies included female individuals only [22, 28, 29, 31–41] and there was an undisclosed gender ratio in 6 [42–50]. Knee OA was defined using clinical and radiographic criteria and is described in Additional file 1: Table S6. Radiographic OA was invariably defined as KL grade ≥2 or any radiographic OA abnormality from the Altman atlas [51]. Individual pain or structural progression measures were examined in 88 studies; 52 studies examined multiple features. Subchondral bone was analyzed with MRI in 113 articles, DXA in 8 [30–32, 42, 52–55], CT in 4 [33, 40, 56, 57], and scintigraphy in 8 [24, 37, 38, 58–62], and no articles using PET met the inclusion criteria. Included articles described 116 knee, 15 hip, 6 hand and 2 ankle studies. Of these studies 13 described structural associations without clinical or radiographic OA [18, 19, 23, 25, 26, 35, 63–69]. There were no articles on studies of the foot that met the inclusion criteria.

Quality assessment of studies

Concordance of opinion in quality scoring was observed in 2,040 (89 %) of the 2,242 scoring items assessed, which are recorded in Additional file 1: Tables S3-S5. The majority of discordant scoring was for study design (criteria 17) and data presentation (criteria 18). Quality scores were converted to percentages of the maximum scores for each class of paper. The mean (range) quality score was 59 % (29–79), 54 % (22–83) and 59 % (47–76) for cross-sectional, cohort and case–control studies, respectively.

Relationship between knee bone feature and structural progression

The association of bone features with structural progression and joint replacement are described in Tables 1 and 5.

Table 1

Knee structural associations by feature and quality grade

Author	Feature (method)	Structural progression outcome	Adjustment for confounders	Association (magnitude) crude	Association (magnitude) adjusted	Association	Quality (score %)
MRI bone marrow lesion - cohorts
Felson 2003 [70]	Baseline presence of BML in medial or lateral TFJ (C)	OARSI JSN grade progression of TFJ (L)	Age, sex, and BMI	NR	OR 6.5,	+	High (83)
Felson 2003 [70]	Baseline presence of BML in medial or lateral TFJ (C)	OARSI JSN grade progression of TFJ (L)	Age, sex, and BMI	NR	95 % CI 3.0 to 14.0	+	High (83)
Dore 2010 [124]	Baseline semi-quantitative MRI BML size (C) TFJ	Incident TKR over 5 years (L)	Age, sex, BMI, knee baseline pain, leg strength, cartilage defects, tibial bone area, ROA	OR (95 % CI)	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (64)
				2.04 (1.55 to 2.69)	2.10 (1.13 to 3.90)
				p <0.01	p = 0.019
Driban 2013 [72]	Knee baseline BML volume (C)	48-month change in OARSI JSN grade (L)	Age, sex, BMI	NR	Baseline BML volume	+	High (61)
	Knee baseline BML volume (C)	48-month change in OARSI JSN grade (L)			OR 1.27, 95 % CI 1.11 to 1.46
	BML volume 48 month change (L) (TFJ)	(TFJ)			BML volume regression
	BML volume 48 month change (L) (TFJ)	(TFJ)			OR 3.36, 95 % CI 1.55 to 7.28
Davies-Tuck 2010 [67]	Incident BML (new BML after 2 years with no BMLs at baseline) MRI TFJ (L)	Progression in semi-quantitative MRI cartilage defects score after 2 years. TFJ (L)	Age, gender, BMI, baseline cartilage volume	OR (95 % CI)	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (61)
				Medial TFJ	Medial TFJ	Association in the lateral TFJ and a trend in the medial TFJ
				1.86 (0.70 to 4.93) p = 0.21	2.63 (0.93 to 7.44) p = 0.07
				Lateral TFJ	Lateral TFJ
				3.0 (1.01 to 8.93) p = 0.05	3.13 (1.01 to 9.68) p = 0.05
Hochberg 2014 [44]	Semi-quantitative MRI baseline femoral condyle BML size (C)	Incident TKR over 6 years (L)	Age, gender, BMI, race, marital status, depressive symptoms, quality of life, mechanical pain, KL grade, clinical effusion.	Medial TFJ	Medial TFJ	+	High (61)
Hochberg 2014 [44]	Semi-quantitative MRI baseline femoral condyle BML size (C)	Incident TKR over 6 years (L)		p <0.0001	p = 0.02	+	High (61)
Raynauld 2011 [75]	Baseline semi-quantitative BML score (C) TFJ	Incidence of TKR over 3 years (L)	Age, sex, BMI, JSW, WOMAC,	NR	OR (95% CI)	+	High (61)
					BML medial plateau
					1.81 (1.08 to 2.03)
					p = 0.025
Raynauld 2013 [74]	Baseline semi-quantitative BML WORMS score (C) medial TFJ	Incident TKR (L) 4 year follow up	Age, BMI, gender WOMAC, CRP	NR	TKR incidence	+	High (61)
		Incident TKR (L) 4 year follow up			OR (95 % CI) 2.107 (1.26 to 3.54) p = 0.005 time to TKR incidence hazard ratio (95% CI) 2.13 (1.38 to 3.30) p = 0.001
		Time to TKR (L)
Crema 2014 [71]	MRI BML (semi-quantitative)	Cartilage loss (semi-quantitative)	Age, gender, BMI	NR	β = 0.37 to 0.64 p <0.001	+	High (56)
Crema 2014 [71]	(C) all regions	(L) (all regions)	Age, gender, BMI	NR	β = 0.37 to 0.64 p <0.001	+	High (56)
Guermazi 2014 Abstract [73]	Baseline semi-quantitative BML score WORMS (C)	Cartilage thickness loss over 30 months (L)	Age, sex, body mass index, and anatomical alignment axis (degrees)	NR	Combined BML score in the medial and lateral TFJ compartment	+	High (56)
Guermazi 2014 Abstract [73]	Baseline semi-quantitative BML score WORMS (C)	Cartilage thickness loss over 30 months (L)		NR	OR 1.9, 95 % CI 1.1 to 3.3	+	High (56)
Scher 2008 [87]	Presence of any baseline semi-quantitative MRI BMLs (C)	Incident TKR (L) over 3 years	Age	NR	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (56)
					8.95 (1.49 to 53.68)
					p = 0.02
Sowers 2011 [28]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML, size in TFJ (C)	Progression in KL grade	Nil	R (95 % CI) medial tibia ~ 0.46 (0.35 to 0.55)	NR	+	Low (53)
Sowers 2011 [28]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML, size in TFJ (C)	(11-year follow up) (L)	Nil	Lateral tibia ~0.23 (0.13 to 0.33)	NR	+	Low (53)
Kothari 2010 [82]	Semi-quantitative baseline MRI BML, (WORMS) (C) TFJ	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect score change over 2 years (WORMS) (L) TFJ.	Age, sex, BMI, other bone lesions	OR 4.04,	OR 3.75,	+	Low (50)
Kothari 2010 [82]	Semi-quantitative baseline MRI BML, (WORMS) (C) TFJ		Age, sex, BMI, other bone lesions	95 % CI 2.25 to 7.26	95 % CI 1.59 to 8.82	+	Low (50)
Raynauld 2008 [85]	Change in BML size (mm) at 24 months in medial TFJ (L)	Medial cartilage volume (L) at 24 months in medial TFJ	Age, gender, BMI, meniscal extrusion and tear, pain and bone lesions at baseline	NR	Change in BML size with femoral cartilage volume loss	-	Low (50)
					Change in BML size with femoral cartilage volume loss	Larger medial BML size means more cartilage loss in medial compartment
					β = −0.31
					standard error (0.08)
					p = 0.0004
Roemer 2009 [90]	Change in MRI semi-quantitative BML size (WORMS) (L) TFJ and PFJ	Progression in semi-quantitative cartilage defects in (WORMS) over 30 months (L) TFJ and PFJ	Age, sex, BMI, baseline KL grade	NR	OR (95 % CI)	+	Low (50)
					Incident BML OR 3.5 (2.1 to 5.9)
					Progression of BML 2.8 (1.5 to 3.2)
					Resolution of BML OR 0.9 (0.5 to 1.6)
					Stable BML OR 1.0 (reference)
Dore 2010 [76]	Baseline semi-quantitative BML severity (C) (medial and lateral TFJ)	Ipsi-compartmental annual Cartilage volume loss (L)	Age, sex, BMI, meniscal damage	NR	Baseline	-	Low (50)
					BML severity	Bigger BML means bigger volume loss
					β = −22.1 to −42.0, for all regions
					(p <0.05)
Parsons 2014 Abstract [83]	Baseline semi-quantitative BML score (C)	Annual TFJ JSN (L)	Age, sex, baseline KL grade	NR	β = −0.10, 95 % CI	+	Low (50)
					−0.18 to
					−0.02
Wildi 2010 [95]	24-month regional change in TFJ BML score WORMS (L)	24-month regional change in cartilage volume (L)	nil	R correlation coefficients all <0.07	NR	NC	Low (50)
Wildi 2010 [95]	24-month regional change in TFJ BML score WORMS (L)	24-month regional change in cartilage volume (L)	nil	p >0.367 for all three compartments at 24 months	NR	NC	Low (50)
Pelletier 2007 [84]	Regional Semi-quantitative baseline BML score (medial or lateral TFJ) (C)	Regional cartilage volume over 24 months (medial or lateral TFJ) (L)	NR	Lateral compartment BML score	NR		Low (50)
Pelletier 2007 [84]			NR	β = −0.31, p = 0.001	NR		Low (50)
Driban 2011 [79]	Baseline BML volume (C) and 24 month change in BML volume (L) in TFJ compartments	24-month change in full thickness cartilage lesion area (L)	Age, sex, body mass index	NR	Baseline BML volume r = 0.48, 95 % CI 0.20 to 0.69	+	Low (50)
					Baseline BML volume r = 0.48, 95 % CI 0.20 to 0.69	Baseline femur BML volume with loss in ipsicompartmental full thickness cartilage lesion area.
					p <0.002
Tanamas 2010 [89]	Baseline semi-quantitative MRI BML size (C) TFJ	Cartilage volume change over 2 years (L) TFJ Incident TKR over 4 years	Age, sex, BMI, baseline tibial cartilage volume and bone area	R (95 % CI)	R (95 % CI)	+	Low (50)
				Total cartilage loss	Total cartilage loss
				0.61 (−0.11 to 1.33)	1.09 (0.24, 1.93)
				OR (95 % CI)	OR (95 % CI)
				Incident TKR	Incident TKR
				1.55 (1.04 to 2.29)	1.57 (1.04 to 2.35)
				p = 0.03	p = 0.03
Madan-Sharma 2008 [93]	Baseline MRI semi-quantitative BML (C) TFJ	OARSI medial TFJ JSN grade progression over 2 years (L) TFJ	Age, sex, BMI, family effect	NR	0.9 RR,	NA	Low (47)
Madan-Sharma 2008 [93]	Baseline MRI semi-quantitative BML (C) TFJ	OARSI medial TFJ JSN grade progression over 2 years (L) TFJ	Age, sex, BMI, family effect	NR	95 % CI 0.18 to 3.0	NA	Low (47)
Tanamas 2010 [88]	Semi-quantitative change in MRI BML severity (C)	Incident TKR over 4 years (L)	Age, gender, KL grade	OR (95 % CI)	OR (95 % CI)	+	Low (47)
				Medial TFJ	Medial TFJ	Association in the medial TFJ but not in the lateral TFJ
				1.72	1.99
				(0.93 to 3.18)	(1.01 to 3.90)
				p = 0.08	p = 0.05
				Lateral TFJ	Lateral TFJ
				0.95 (0.48 to 1.88)	0.96 (0.48 to 1.94)
				p = 0.89	p = 0.91
Roemer 2012 [86]	Semi-quantitative BML (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage score 6-month progression TFJ and PFJ (L)	Age, sex, treatment, and BMI.	NR	BML TFJ OR 4.74, 95 % CI 1.14 to 19.5	+	Low (44)
					p = 0.032	BMLs and cartilage score correlate
					BML PFJ OR, 1.63 (0.67 to 3.92)	BMLs and cartilage score correlate
Crema 2013 [78]	MRI incident BML (WORMS)	Progressive (30 month) semi-quantitative cartilage defect (WORMS) TFJ (L)	Age, sex, BMI, malalignment, meniscal disease	NR	OR (95 % CI)	+	Low (44)
	TFJ				Medial TFJ 7.6
	(L)				(5.1 to 11.3)
					Lateral TFJ
					11.9 (6.2 to 23.0)
Hernandez-Molina 2008 [81]	Crude presence of central BMLs on MRI (C) TFJ	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect (WORMS) (L) TFJ	Alignment, BMI, KL grade, sex, and age.	NR	Medial TFJ cartilage loss	+	Low (44)
					OR 6.1,
					95 % CI 1.0, 35.2
Koster 2011 [25]	Baseline BML presence (C) TFJ	Any progression in KL grade over 1 year (L) TFJ	Age, BMI	OR (95 % CI)	OR (95 % CI)	+	Low (44)
				6.01 (1.92 to 18.8)	5.29 (1.64 to 17.1)
				p = 0.002	p = 0.005
Hunter 2006 [91]	Change in MRI semi-quantitative BML score (L) TFJ	Change in semi-quantitative cartilage defect score (WORMS) (L) medial or lateral TFJ	Limb alignment	Ipsilateral cartilage loss	Ipsilateral cartilage loss	NA after adjustment	Low (44)
				β = 0.65	β = 0.26
				p = 0.003	p = 0.16
				Contralateral cartilage loss	Contralateral cartilage loss
				β = −0.27	β = −0.16
				p = 0.22	p = 0.52
Roemer 2009 [94]	Baseline MRI BML crude presence or absence (WORMS) (L) TFJ	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect progression over 30 months (WORMS) (L) TFJ	Age, sex, race, BMI, alignment	OR (95 % CI)	OR (95 % CI)	NA	Low (44)
				Slow cartilage loss OR 1.74 (0.85 to 3.55)	Slow cartilage loss OR 1.79 (0.83 to 3.87)
				Fast cartilage loss OR 1.32 (0.37 to 4.78)	Fast cartilage loss OR 1.0 (0.24 to 4.10)
Kubota 2010 [92]	MRI BML semi-quantitative volume score change over 6 months (L) TFJ	KL grade progression over 6 months (L) TFJ	Nil	BML score higher in KL progression group	NR	NC	Low (39)
Kubota 2010 [92]		KL grade progression over 6 months (L) TFJ	Nil	p = 0.044	NR	NC	Low (39)
Driban 2012 abstract [80]	MRI BML volume change (L) TFJ over 24 months	Change in cartilage thickness and denuded area of bone (L) TFJ over 24 months	Nil	Cartilage thickness	NR	+	Low (28)
				r = −0.34, p = 0.04
				denuded bone
				r = 0.42, p = 0.01
				Femoral cartilage indices p >0.05
Carrino 2006 [77]	Crude presence of MRI BML, TFJ (C) and (L)	Any grade of cartilage defect TFJ (C) and (L)	Nil	NR	NR	+	Low (22)
MRI bone marrow lesion - cross-sectional studies
Baranyay 2007 [63]	MRI BML defined as large or not large/absent in the medial and lateral compartments of TFJ (C)	MRI semi-quantitative cartilage defects of medial and lateral compartments of TFJ (C)	Age, gender, BMI, cartilage volume or bone area	OR (95 % CI)	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (71 %)
		Quantitative cartilage volume medial and lateral TFJ (C)		Cartilage defect Medial TFJ	Cartilage defect Medial TFJ	Cartilage defects
				1.81 (1.26 to 2.59) p = 0.005	1.80 (1.21 to 2.69) p = 0.004	NA
				Lateral TFJ	Lateral TFJ	Cartilage volume
				1.52 (1.14 to 2.04)	1.45 (1.02 to 2.07)
				p = 0.005	p = 0.04
				No association with ipsicompartmental cartilage volume	No association with ipsicompartmental cartilage volume
Guymer 2007 [35]	Presence or absence of MRI BMLs	Presence or absence of semi-quantitative cartilage defects	Age, height, weight, and tibial cartilage volume	OR (95 % CI)	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (71)
	(C) TFJ	(C) TFJ		Medial TFJ	Medial TFJ	A positive association is observed in the medial but not the lateral TFJ
				6.46 (1.04 to 38.39)	3.51 (1.08 to 11.42)
				p = 0.04	p = 0.04
				Lateral TFJ	Lateral TFJ
				1.17 (0.22 to 6.26)	1.02 (0.17 to 6.12)
				p = 0.85	p = 0.98
Stehling 2010 [65]	Presence of any MRI semi-quantitative BMLs (C)	Presence of any WORMS MRI cartilage defects (C)	Age, gender and BMI, KL score, knee injury or knee surgery, family history of TKR and Heberden's nodes	NR	p <0.0001	+	High (71)
Torres 2006 [103]	MRI BML (WORMS) (C) TFJ and PFJ	Semi-quantitative cartilage (WORMS) (C)	Nil	R = 0.56	NR	+	High (68)
Ip 2011 [99]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	KL grade (C)	Age, sex, BMI, OA stage, joint effusion, and meniscal damage	NR	Highest BML score p <0.001	+	High (68)
Hayes 2005 [22]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	p = 0.005	NR	+	High (61)
Kornaat 2005 [100]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (KOSS)	Semi-quantitative cartilage defects (KOSS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Nil	OR (95 % CI)	NR	+	Low (57)
	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (KOSS)			PFJ
	TFJ and PFJ (C)			17 (3.8 to 72)
				TFJ
				120 (6.5 to 2,221)
Gudbergsen 2013 [98]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (BLOKS) (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	KL grade	NR	+	Low (57)
				p = 0.046 lateral
				p <0.001 medial
Link 2003 [101]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML, (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	p <0.05	NR	+	Low (54)
Sowers 2003 [29]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect (C)	Nil	p for trend	NR	+	Low (54)
Sowers 2003 [29]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect (C)	Nil	p <0.0001	NR	+	Low (54)
Felson 2001 [96]	Semi-quantitative MRI BMLs (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	NR	NR	+	Low (54)
Lo 2005 [102]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (WORMS ≥ 1) (C)	KL grade ≥ 2 (C)	Nil	NR	NR	+	Low (50)
Meredith 2009 [64]	Sum of semi-quantitative MRI	Sum of semi-quantitative MRI	Nil	p <0.0003	NR	+	Low (50)
Meredith 2009 [64]	BML scores in the TFJ and PFJ (C)	Cartilage defect scores in the TFJ and PFJ (C)	Nil	p <0.0003	NR	+	Low (50)
Fernandez-Madrid 1994 [97]	Crude presence of MRI BMLs (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	p <0.001	NR	+	Low (46)
Scher 2008 [87]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect (modified Noyes) (C)	Nil	p = 0.012	NR	+	Low (43)
MRI bone marrow lesion - case control studies
Ratzlaff 2014 [104]	Total tibial BML volume 12 and 24 months before TKR and interval change between 12 and 24 (C) and (L) TFJ	Incident TKR (L)	NB matched cases and controls	OR (95 % CI)	NR	+	High (65)
				12 months (C)		True of TFJ but not PFJ
				1.68 (1.33 to 2.13)
				24 months (C)
				1.35 (1.02 to 1.78)
				12 to 24 months change (L)
				1.23 (1.03 to 1.46)
Zhao 2010 [105]	Baseline crude presence of MRI BMLs at (C) TFJ	Overlying cartilage defect progression after 1 year (WORMS) (L) TFJ	Nil	Change in cartilage defect scores for areas with and without underlying BMLs	NR	+	Low (56)
Zhao 2010 [105]	Baseline crude presence of MRI BMLs at (C) TFJ		Nil	p = 0.00003	NR	+	Low (56)
Aitken 2013 Abstract [17]	Semi-quantitative BMLs tibia, femur and patella	Cartilage volume and defect score tibia and femur	Age, sex, BMI	NR	Tibial cartilage volume	-	Low (47)
					β = −433 mm³ per unit increase in BML
					p <0.01
Stahl 2011 [41]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML size (WORMS) (L) TFJ	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect size (L) TFJ	Nil	NR	p <0.165	NA	Low (47)
MRI osteophyte - cohort studies
De-Lange 2014 abstract [106]	Semi-quantitative osteophyte (KOSS) (C)	Radiographic progression of JSN of TFJ (L)	Age, gender, BMI and baseline JSN	NR	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (61)
De-Lange 2014 abstract [106]	Semi-quantitative osteophyte (KOSS) (C)	Radiographic progression of JSN of TFJ (L)	Age, gender, BMI and baseline JSN	NR	1.8 (1.1 to 3.1)	Higher OST score, the higher the JSN	High (61)
Liu 2014 Abstract [45]	Baseline semi-quantitative osteophyte score (WORMS) (C) TFJ	Incident TKR at 6-months follow up (L)	Activity of daily living disability score	NR	RR (95 % CI) 3.01 (1.39 to 6.52)	+	Low (50)
Sowers 2011 [28]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophyte size in TFJ (C)	Progression in KL grade (11-year follow up) (L)	Nil	R (95 % CI) medial tibia ~ 0.65 (0.59 to 0.71)	NR	+	Low (53)
Sowers 2011 [28]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophyte size in TFJ (C)	Progression in KL grade (11-year follow up) (L)	Nil	Lateral tibia ~0.57 (0.49 to 0.63)	NR	+	Low (53)
MRI osteophyte - cross-sectional studies
Stehling 2010 [65]	Presence of any MRI semi-quantitative osteophytes (C)	Presence of any WORMS MRI cartilage defects (C)	Age, gender and BMI, KL score, knee injury or knee surgery, family history of TKR and Heberden’s nodes	NR	p = 0.0037	+	High (71)
Torres 2006 [103]	MRI osteophyte, (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Nil	R = 0.73	NR	+	High (68)
Hayes 2005 [22]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophyte (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	p <0.001	NR	+	High (61)
Meredith 2009 [64]	Sum of semi-quantitative MRI	Sum of semi-quantitative MRI	Nil	p <0.0001	NR	+	Low (50)
Meredith 2009 [64]	Osteophyte scores in the TFJ and PFJ (C)	cartilage defect scores in the TFJ and PFJ (C)	Nil	p <0.0001	NR	+	Low (50)
McCauley 2001 [26]	MRI central osteophyte presence (C) TFJ	MRI cartilage lesion presence (C) TFJ	Nil	Crude association of 32 of 35 central osteophytes having adjacent cartilage lesions	NR	+	Low (29)
McCauley 2001 [26]	MRI central osteophyte presence (C) TFJ	MRI cartilage lesion presence (C) TFJ	Nil		NR	Crude, unadjusted	Low (29)
Roemer 2012 [108]	MRI osteophyte	Cartilage defect (WORMS) (C)	Age, sex, BMI, race, TFJ radiographic OA	OR 2378.1,	OR 108.8,	+	Low (57)
	MRI osteophyte			95 % CI 249.8 to 22643.4	95 % CI 14.2 to 834.9
	(WORMS) (C)				95 % CI 14.2 to 834.9
	(WORMS) (C)				p for trend <0.0001
Link 2003 [101]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophytes (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	p <0.01	NR	+	Low (54)
Fernandez-Madrid 1994 [97]	Crude presence of MRI osteophytes (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	p <0.001	NR	+	Low (46)
MRI bone attrition - cohort studies
Kothari 2010 [82]	Semi-quantitative baseline MRI attrition	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect score change over 2 years (WORMS) (L) TFJ.	Age, sex BMI, other bone lesions	OR 3.17,	OR 1.85,	NA	Low (50)
	Semi-quantitative baseline MRI attrition			95 % CI 1.64 to 6.16	95 % CI 0.71 to 4.82
	(WORMS) (C) TFJ			95 % CI 1.64 to 6.16	95 % CI 0.71 to 4.82
MRI bone attrition - cross-sectional studies
Torres 2006 [103]	MRI attrition (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Nil	R = 0.75	NR	+	High (68)
Reichenbach 2008 [110]	Semi-quantitative MRI bone attrition (WORMS) (C)	KL grade and semi-quantitative cartilage defects (WORMS) (C)	Nil	NR	NR	+	Low (43)
Reichenbach 2008 [110]	Semi-quantitative MRI bone attrition (WORMS) (C)		Nil	Crude correlation	NR	+	Low (43)
MRI bone attrition - case control studies
Neogi 2009 [109]	Baseline semi-quantitative MRI bone attrition size (WORMS) (C) TFJ	Cartilage defects progression (WORMS) after 30 months TFJ	Age, sex, BMI	OR 5.5,	OR 3.0,	+	Low (59)
Neogi 2009 [109]		Cartilage defects progression (WORMS) after 30 months TFJ	Age, sex, BMI	95 % CI 3.0 to 10.0	95 % CI 2.2 to 4.2	+	Low (59)
MRI bone Shape/dimension – cohort studies
Cicuttini 2004 [111]	Baseline quantitative MRI tibial bone area (C)	TKR incidence (L) over 4 years	Age, sex, height, weight, BMI, WOMAC, ROA severity	NR	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (78)
					1.2 (1.0 to 1.4)
					p = 0.02
Ding 2008 [20]	Baseline MRI tibial bone area (C) TFJ	Progressive cartilage volume loss (L) TFJ	Age, sex, BMI, OA family history, muscle strength and ROA.	β (95 % CI)	β (95 % CI)	-	High (72)
				Medial femoral cartilage	Medial femoral cartilage
				β = 0.17 (0.04 to 0.29)	β = 0.35 (0.14 to 0.56)
				Total femoral cartilage	Total femoral cartilage
				β = 0.07	β = 0.13
				(0.003 to 0.14)	(0.02 to 0.25)
Ding 2006 [18]	Baseline MRI tibial bone area (C) TFJ	Change in semi-quantitative MRI cartilage defect scores over 2.3 years (L) TFJ	Age, sex, BMI, radiographic OA \features	NA	OR (95%CI)	-	High (61)
					Medial TFJ
					1.24 (1.01 to 1.51)
					p = 0.04
					Lateral TFJ
					2.07 (1.52 to 2.82)
					p <0.001
Everhart 2014 [114]	Baseline TFJ subchondral surface ratio of medial and lateral TFJ compartments (C)	Radiographic progression of lateral or medial TFJ knee OA at 48 months (L)	Sex, race, age, BMI, tobacco use, activity level, knee coronal alignment, baseline symptoms, injury history, surgery history, KL grade, and JSW	Unadjusted medial SSR vs progression of medial JSN	Neither medial nor lateral SSR was associated lateral or medial ROA progression in adjusted analysis p <0.05.	NA	High (61)
				OR 1.43, 95 % CI 1.15 to 1.77
				p = 0.0015
				Medial SSR vs progression of lateral JSN
				OR 1.87, 95 % CI 1.44 to 2.42
				p <0.001
Davies-Tuck 2008 [112]	Baseline MRI tibial bone plateau area (C) TFJ	Progressive semi-quantitative cartilage defect score (L) medial and lateral TFJ	Age, sex, BMI, baseline cartilage defect score, baseline cartilage volume and baseline tibial plateau area	Lateral TFJ	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (56)
Davies-Tuck 2008 [112]	Baseline MRI tibial bone plateau area (C) TFJ			OR (95 % CI) −0.01 (−0.06 to 0.03) p = 0.59	Lateral TFJ 0.06 (0.004 to 0.11) p = 0.03 Medial TFJ 0.07 (0.03 to 0.12) p = 0.002	+	High (56)
Carnes 2012 [113]	MRI tibial bone area (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect progression TFJ (L)	Age, sex, BMI, cartilage defects, BML	Lateral tibial bone area OR 1.11, 95 % CI 1.0 to 1.23	OR (95 % CI) bone area medial 1.12 (1.01 to 1.26) and lateral tibial (1.35 (1.12 to 1.63)	+	Low (50)
Dore 2010 [68]	Baseline tibial bone area MRI (C)	Increase or no increase in semi-quantitative MRI tibial cartilage defects over 2.7 years (L)	Age, sex, body mass index, baseline cartilage defects, and subchondral bone mineral density	NR	OR (95 % CI) medial tibia 1.6 (1.0 to 2.6) p = 0.04 lateral tibia 2.4 (1.4 to 4.0) p <0.01	+ Bone area size is associated with increasing cartilage defect scores	Low (50)
Hudelmaier 2013 [180] Abstract	Annual change in segmented MRI knee bone area (L)	Baseline KL grade (C)	Nil	Medial tibia p <0.05	NR	+ The higher the KL grade the larger the increase in bone area	Low (50)
MRI bone shape/dimension - cross-sectional studies
Ding 2005 [19]	MRI quantitative tibial bone area (C)	Semi-quantitative MRI knee cartilage defect severity scores (C) TFJ	Age, sex, BMI, family history, cartilage volume	β (95 % CI) medial TFJ 0.06 (0.03 to 0.09) lateral TFJ 0.09 (0.05 to 0.13)	β (95 % CI) medial TFJ 0.11 (0.07 to 0.15) lateral TFJ 0.17 (0.11 to 0.22)	+ Association maintained for the whole TFJ and by compartment	High (64)
Kalichman 2007 [165]	MRI patellar length ratio, trochlea sulcus angle (C)	JSN grade (C)	Age, sex, BMI	NR	Trochlea sulcus angle p for trend, medial JSN p = 0.0162, lateral JSN p = 0.1206	NC	High (64)
Kalichman 2007 [115]	MRI patellar length ratio, trochlea sulcus angle (C)	Cartilage defect (WORMS) (C)	Age, sex, BMI	NR	Trochlea sulcus angle p for trend, medial cartilage loss p = 0.0016, lateral cartilage loss p = 0.0009	+	Low (57)
Stefanik 2012 [116]	MRI lateral trochlear inclination and trochlear angle (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect (WORMS) (C)	Age, sex, BMI	NR	Lateral trochlear inclination OR 2, 95 % CI 1.9 to 3.7, p <0.0001, trochlear angle OR 2.0, 95 % CI 1.2 to 3.5, p <0.0001	+	Low (57)
Frobell 2010 [107]	MRI bone area - manual segmentation (C)	KL grade, OARSI JSN grade (C)	Age and BMI	Medial tibia JSN and KL p <0.0125	Medial tibia JSN and KL p <0.0125	+	Low (57)
Wang 2005 [66]	Annual % change in tibial bone area (L) 2 years follow up	Baseline JSN (C)	Age, sex, BMI, WOMAC score, SF-36 score, physical activity, radiographic OA features, baseline tibial plateau bone area.	β (95 % CI) medial tibia β = 0.35 (−1.10 to 1.80) p = 0.63, lateral tibia −0.87 (−2.35 to 0.61) p = 0.25	β (95 % CI) medial tibia 1.88 (0.43 to 3.33) p = 0.01 lateral tibia −0.42 (−2.31 to 1.48) p = 0.66	+ Association with medial tibia but not in the lateral tibia	Low (57)
Jones 2004 [23]	Tibial bone area (MRI) (C)	Radiographic JSN (C)	Age, sex, height, weight	β (95 % CI) medial tibia β = −0.03 (−0.11 to 0.06), lateral tibia −0.00 (−0.07 to 0.06)	β (95 % CI) medial tibia β = −0.00 (−0.04 to 0.06), lateral tibia +0.00 (−0.04 to 0.05)	NA	Low (50)
Eckstein 2010 [117]	MRI tibial bone area (segmented) (C)	OARSI JSN grade (C)	Nil	p <0.01	NR	+	Low (43)
MRI bone shape/dimension - case–control studies
Bowes 2013 [118]	Change in segmented MRI 3D bone area over 4 years (L)	KL grade defined ROA knee (C) and (L)	Nil	NR bone area increased significantly faster in ROA vs non-ROA p <0.0001	NR	+ Higher KL grades had greater increase in bone area,	High (71)
Neogi 2013 [120]	MRI 3D bone shape (tibia, femur and patella) (C)	Incident TFJ ROA KL grade ≥2 (L)	Age, sex, BMI	NR	OR 3, 95 % CI 1.8 to 5.0	+ Developing 3D OA knee shape is associated with increasing ROA knee	High (65)
Hunter 2013 abstract [119]	Change in MRI knee bone area over 24 months (L)	Incident TFJ ROA (KL grade ≥2) (L)	NR	NR	Hazard ratio (95 % CI) range from 1.17 (1.08 to 1.27) to 3.97 (2.38 to 6.63), all highly statistically significant	+ for all bone regions Enlarging bone area associated with increasing ROA knee	Low (59)
Wluka 2005 [121]	Change in MRI tibial bone area (L)	Baseline radiographic JSN (C)	Age, BMI, pain, physical activity	Medial tibial bone area R = 160, 95 % CI 120 to 201, p <0.001	Medial tibial bone area R = 145, 95 % CI 103 to 186, p <0.001	+	Low (47)
MRI bone cyst - cohort studies
Kotharii 2010 [82]	Semi-quantitative baseline MRI bone cyst (WORMS) (C) TFJ	Semi-quantitative cartilage defect score change over 2 years (WORMS) (L) TFJ.	Age, sex BMI, other bone lesions	OR 1.66, 95 % CI 0.55 to 4.99	OR 0.47, 95 % CI 0.11 to 2.03	NA	Low (50)
Tanamas 2010 [88]	Semi-quantitative change in MRI bone cyst size (L)	Knee Cartilage volume loss over 2 years (L) TFJ	Nil	β (95 % CI) lateral tibial cartilage loss in cyst regression relative to stable and progressive cysts	NR	+	Low (47)
Tanamas 2010 [88]	Semi-quantitative change in MRI bone cyst size (L)	Knee Cartilage volume loss over 2 years (L) TFJ	Nil	β = −11.81 (−16.64 to −6.98)	NR	+	Low (47)
Madan-Sharma 2008 [93]	Baseline MRI semi-quantitative bone cyst (C) TFJ	OARSI medial TFJ JSN grade progression over 2 years (L) TFJ	Age, sex, BMI and family effect	NR	RR 1.6, 95 % CI 0.5 to 4.0	NA	Low (47)
Carrino 2006 [77]	Crude presence of MRI bone cyst TFJ (C) and (L)	Any grade of cartilage defect TFJ (C) and (L)	Nil	NR	NR	+	Low (22)
MRI bone cyst -– cross-sectional studies
Stehling 2010 [65]	Presence of any MRI semi-quantitative cyst (C)	Presence of any WORMS MRI cartilage defects (C)	Age, gender and BMI, KL score, knee injury or knee surgery, family history of TKR and Heberden’s nodes	NR	p = 0.0131	+	High (71)
Torres 2006 [103]	MRI bone cyst (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Nil	R = 0.75		NC	High (68)
Hayes 2005 [22]	Semi-quantitative MRI bone cyst (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	p = 0.02	NR	+	High (61)
Link 2003 [101]	Crude presence of MRI bone cyst (C)	KL grade (C)	Nil	p <0.01	NR	+	Low (54)
Crema 2010 [122]	MRI Bone cysts (WORMS) (C)	Cartilage defect (WORMS) (C)	Nil	NR	NR	+	Low (50)
CT bone cyst – cross-sectional studies
Okazaki 2014 [40]	Number of CT bone cysts (medial femur and tibia) (C)	Knee KL grade (C)	Nil	p <0.05	Nil	+with KL grade in medial TFJ	Low (50)
MRI subchondral bone morphometry - cohort studies
Lo 2012 Abstract [53]	MRI BVF, trabecular number, thickness and spacing (C)	OARSI medial TFJ JSN progression between 24 and 48 months (L)	Nil	OR 2.4, 95 % CI 1.1 to 5.0, p = 0.02	NR	BVF, trabecular number and thickness are positively associated with JSN progression but negatively associated with trabecular spacing.	Low (50)
MRI subchondral bone morphometry - cross-sectional studies
Driban 2011 [50] Abstract	MRI bone volume fraction, trabecular number, spacing & thickness of medial tibia (C)	The presence of any grade of radiographic medial & lateral JSN (C)	Nil	R = 0.09 to 1.77	NR	+ Medial JSN associated with higher BVF, trabecular number and thickness but lower spacing	High (71)
Driban 2011 [49]	MRI bone volume fraction (C)	Radiographic JSN (C)	Nil	NR	NR	+ Higher JSN score, lower JSW) were associated with higher BVF	High (64)
Lindsey 2004 [123]	MRI bone volume fraction trabecular and trabecular number (TFJ) (C)	Cartilage volume of tibia or femur in contralateral TFJ compartment (C)	Nil	Medial TFJ cartilage with lateral TFJ BVF and trabecular number. β = 0.29 to 0.36, p = 0.0020 to 0.02	NR	+ With contralateral BVF and trabecular number, but – with trabecular spacing	High (64)
Lo 2012 [54]	MRI bone volume fraction, trabecular thickness, number, spacing and DXA BMD of (proximal medial tibia) (C)	Radiographic medial JSN grade (C)	Nil	All p <0.0001	Nil	+ (BV/TV, thickness, number, BMD) (spacing)	High (64)
Chiba 2012 [34]	MRI bone volume fraction and trabecular thickness of the medial & lateral femur & tibia. (C)	Metric JSW (radiographic) of the medial and lateral TFJ (C)	Nil	Bone volume fraction −0.48 (p <0.001) trabecular thickness −0.51 (p <0.001)	NR	-	Low (57)
DXA BMD - cohort studies
Dore 2010 [68]	Baseline proximal tibial BMD, DXA (C)	Increase or no increase in semi-quantitative MRI tibial cartilage defects over 2.7 years (L)	Age, sex, BMI, baseline cartilage defects and subchondral tibial bone area	NR	OR (95 % CI) medial tibia 1.6 (1.2 to 2.1) p <0.01 lateral tibia 1.2 (0.9, 1.6) p = 0.19	+ Association only observed in medial tibia	Low (50)
Lo 2012 Abstract [53]	DXA-measured medial:lateral periarticular BMD (paBMD) (C)	OARSI medial TFJ JSN progression (L)	Nil	OR 8.4, 95 % CI 2.8 to 25.0, p <0.0001	nil	+ JSN association with baseline M:L paBMD	Low (50)
Bruyere 2003 [42]	Subchondral tibial bone BMD (DXA) (C)	Minimum medial JSW TFJ after one year (L)	Age, sex, BMI, minimum JSW	NR	R = −0.43, p = 0.02	Negative correlation i.e., lower BMD gives bigger JSW or less JSN	Low (44)
DXA BMD - cross-sectional studies
Dore 2009 [52]	DXA tibial subchondral BMD (C)	Radiograph JSN grade and MRI cartilage defect and volume (C)	Age, sex BMI	NR	Medial tibial BMD vs JSN R = 0.11, p <0.01, defect R = 0.16, p <0.01, cartilage volume R = 0.12, p = 0.01	+ Higher the BMD the greater the JSN and cartilage defects,	High (71)
Lo 2006 [55]	DXA medial:lateral BMD ratio at the tibial plateau (C)	Radiographic JSN grade (medial and lateral TFJ) (C)	Age, sex, BMI	p <0.0001	NR	+ With medial JSN, − with lateral JSN	High (71)
Lo 2012 [54]	DXA BMD (proximal medial tibia) (C)	Radiographic medial JSN grade (C)	Nil	p <0.0001	NR	+	High (64)
Akamatsu 2014 [31] Abstract	BMD (DXA) (C) (medial tibia and femoral condyle)	Medial TFJ JSN (radiographic) (C)	Nil	Tibia R = 0.571, p <0.001 femur R = 0.550, p < 0.001	NR	+ Medial femoral and tibial condyle BMD correlated with medial JSN	Low (57)
Volumetric CT BMD - case control studies
Bennell 2008 [56]	Volumetric BMD in tibial subchondral trabecular bone (C)	KL grade (C)	Age, sex, BMI	NR	p <0.05	NC BMD falls in posterior tibial plateau as KL increases but anteriorly increase in BMD noted	Low (59)
Knee scintigraphic subchondral bone cohort studies
Mazzuca 2004 [37]	Baseline late-phase subchondral bone scintigraphy (adjusted for healthy diaphysis uptake) of the medial tibia and whole knee (C)	Progression of minimum JSN of the medial TFJ from baseline to 30 months (L)	Age, BMI, KL grade (NB all women)	r = 0.22 to 0.30 (p <0.05)	r = 0 to 0.08 (p <0.05)	NA after adjustment for covariates	High (56)
Mazzuca 2005 [38]	Baseline late-phase subchondral bone scintigraphy (adjusted for healthy diaphysis uptake) of the medial tibia and whole knee (C)	Progression of minimum JSN of the medial TFJ from baseline to 30 months (L)	Baseline JSW, treatment group	NR	Coefficient 0.221, 95 % CI 0.003 to 0.439, p = 0.049	+ The greater the scintigraphic bone signal the greater the JSN	High (56)
Dieppe 1993 [58]	Baseline late and or early-phase subchondral bone scintigraphy signal (C)	Progression of JSN by ≥2 mm or knee operation incidence after 5 years (L)	Nil	p <0.005	NR	+	Low (50)
Knee scintigraphic subchondral bone cross-sectional studies
Kraus 2009 [59]	Ipsilateral late-phase bone scintigraphy, semi-quantitative retention scoring of TFJ (C)	Ipsilateral OARSI scale of JSN (C)	Age, gender, BMI, osteophyte OARSI score, knee alignment knee symptoms	Coefficient 0.47 to 0.48 (p <0.0001)	Coefficient 0.26 to 0.29 (p = 0.0005 to 0.001)	+	High (71)
McCrae 1992 [62]	Late-phase ‘extended bone uptake’ pattern bone scintigraphy, presence around the TFJ (C)	Radiographic JSN presence (C)	Nil	OR 47.3, 95% CI 6.4 to 352, p <0.01	NR	+	Low (50)
2D knee bone shape – cross-sectional studies
Haverkamp 2011 [36]	2D bone shape knee. 1. Femur and tibial width 2. Elevation of lateral tibial plateau (C)	1. Presence of diffuse cartilage defects semi-quantitative scoring (MRI). 2. Presence of ROA knee (KL ≥2) (C)	NB (this is a population of women only) ROA models adjusted for age, BMI; cartilage defect models adjusted for KL only	OR (95 % CI) bone width vs knee ROA 2.03 (1.55 to 2.66) p <0.001 bone width Presence of diffuse cartilage defects p <0.001	OR (95 % CI) knee ROA 1.94 (1.44 to 2.62) p <0.001	+ Wider bones and elevated tibial plateau were associated with the presence of ROA knee. Cartilage defects were only associated with bone width	Low (46)

Positive correlation reported between bone feature and outcome measure (+); negative correlation reported between bone feature and outcome measure (−). BMD bone mineral density, BMI body mass index, BML bone marrow lesion, BOKS Boston osteoarthritis of the knee study, BLOKS Boston–Leeds osteoarthritis knee score, BVF bone volume fraction, C a feature or outcome described in cross-section, CT computed tomography, DXA dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, GARP Genetics, osteoarthritis and progression study, JSN joint space narrowing, JSW joint space width, KL Kellgren-Lawrence, KOSS knee osteoarthritis scoring system, L a feature or outcome described longitudinally, MAK-2 mechanical factors in arthritis of the knee 2. NC no conclusion could be found for an association between bone feature and outcome measure, SWAN Michigan study of women’s health across the nation, MOST multicentre osteoarthritis study, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, NA no association. NR not reported, OA osteoarthritis, OAI Osteoarthritis Initiative, OR odds ratio, RR relative risk ratio, SSR subchondral surface ratio TASOAC Tasmanian older adult cohort, TFJ tibiofemoral joint, VAS visual analogue scale, WOMAC Western Ontario and McMaster Universities arthritis index, WORMS whole-organ magnetic resonance imaging score, CRP C-reactive protein, TKR total knee replacement, OARSI Osteoarthritis Research Society International, PFJ patellofemoral joint, ROA radiographic osteoarthritis

Bone marrow lesions

MRI (31 cohort, 15 cross-sectional, 4 case–control studies): in prospective cohorts with high- quality, well-adjusted analyses the presence and increasing size of baseline BMLs and incidence of BMLs conferred greater odds of structural progression [67, 70–73]. Similarly increasing baseline BML size increased the risk of total knee replacement (TKR) and expedited the outcome of TKR [44, 74–76]. The association between BMLs and structural progression of OA was maintained in cohorts without clinical features of knee OA [67] and in analyses with poorer quality or statistical adjustment [25, 28, 76–90]. Only five low quality cohort analyses did not support these findings [91–95]. All cross-sectional analyses found positive correlation between BMLs and structural severity of OA [22, 29, 35, 63–65, 87, 96–103]. Three case–control analyses found similar associations [17, 104, 105]. In summary, BMLs are independently associated with structural progression of OA of the knee and incident TKR.

Osteophytes

MRI (three cohorts, eight cross-sectional studies): in one prospective cohort with high quality and well-adjusted analysis, the increasing size of osteophytes conferred greater odds of structural progression of OA [106]. In lower quality, inadequately adjusted, prospective cohorts, increasing osteophyte size increased the risk of incident TKR and structural progression of OA [28, 45]. The increasing size and presence of osteophytes was associated with greater structural progression or severity in all included analyses [22, 26, 28, 45, 64, 65, 97, 101, 103, 106–108]. In summary, osteophytes are independently associated with knee structural progression and are associated with TKR incidence.

Bone attrition

MRI (one cohort, two cross-sectional, one case–control study): one prospective, well-adjusted, but below-average-quality cohort analysis found an association with baseline attrition severity and structural progression that became insignificant after covariate adjustment [82]. The unadjusted cross-sectional analyses and case–control analysis found similar associations with structural severity [103, 109, 110]. In summary, bone attrition is associated, but not independently so, with structural progression.

Bone shape/dimension

MRI (eight cohort, seven cross-sectional, four case–control studies): in prospective cohorts with high quality well-adjusted analyses, greater baseline tibial plateau bone area conferred greater odds of structural progression of OA and incidence of TKR [18, 20, 111, 112]. The same association was observed in a lower quality, prospective-cohort, well-adjusted analysis [113] and in a study of the knee in patients who predominantly had no radiographic evidence of knee OA [18]. The mismatch ratio of the femoral and tibial articulating areas was not associated with structural progression after adjustment [114], but the trochlear sulcus angle and shape was associated with cross-sectional patellofemoral structural severity demonstrated on MRI [115, 116]. All cross-sectional [23, 66, 107, 117] and case–control [118–121] analyses of tibial bone area or 3D knee bone shape found association with structural severity [23, 66, 107, 117–121]. In summary, tibial bone area is independently associated with structural progression of OA of the knee and incidence of TKR.

Bone cyst

MRI and CT (five cohort, five cross-sectional) studies: two prospective cohorts with well-adjusted but below-average-quality analyses of cysts reported no association with structural progression of OA before or after adjustment [82, 93]. Two prospective cohorts with low quality unadjusted analyses of cysts found an association with structural progression of OA [77, 88]. Cross-sectional well-adjusted [65] and unadjusted [22, 40, 101, 122] cyst analyses found an association with structural severity. In summary, after covariate adjustment there is no independent association between cysts and structural progression of OA.

Trabecular bone morphometry

MRI (one cohort, five cross-sectional studies): one prospective cohort, unadjusted, below-average-quality analysis reported increasing bone volume fraction, trabecular number and thickness and decreasing trabecular spacing were associated with structural progression [53]. The same bone changes were associated with structural severity in cross-sectional unadjusted analyses [34, 49, 50, 54, 123]. In summary, increasing bone volume fraction, trabecular number, trabecular thickness, and decreasing trabecular spacing are associated with structural progression and severity of OA of the knee.

Peri-articular bone mineral density

DXA and CT (three cohort, four cross-sectional, one–case control study): two prospective cohorts with well-adjusted but below-average-quality analyses reported that increasing tibial subchondral BMD is associated with structural progression of OA [42, 68]. In one prospective cohort with an unadjusted below-average-quality analysis, the medial-to-lateral ratio of tibial peri-articular BMD was associated with structural progression [53]. All cross-sectional analyses [31, 52, 54, 55], including two that were well-adjusted [52, 55], reported increasing BMD with greater structural severity. One well-adjusted analysis using quantitative CT (qCT) reported higher and lower BMD in the anterior and posterior tibial plateau, respectively, in knees of patients with moderate OA relative to asymptomatic controls. In summary, increasing peri-articular radiographic BMD is associated with structural progression and severity of OA.

Scintigraphy

Scintigraphy (three cohort, two cross-sectional studies): prospective cohorts with high quality analyses found greater late-phase bone signal was associated with structural progression of OA, with no or inadequate covariate adjustment [37, 38], but not after adequate covariate adjustment [37]. A prospective cohort, with below-average-quality, unadjusted analysis found greater bone signal was associated with structural progression of OA [58]. Bone signal was associated with structural severity in well-adjusted and unadjusted cross-sectional analyses [59, 62]. In summary, bone scintigraphy signal is associated, but not independently so, with structural progression of OA.

2D Knee bone shape

One cross-sectional, well-adjusted analysis identified an association between greater femoral and tibial bone width and elevating tibial plateau, and greater structural severity [36]. In summary, 2D bone shape is associated with structural severity of OA.

Relationship between knee bone feature and pain

The association between bone features and pain is described in Tables 2 and 5. In all types of study, bone features were compared with the presence, chronicity and severity of pain. In longitudinal studies, bone features were also compared with change in the presence or severity of pain (e.g., change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities arthritis index (WOMAC) pain score). Change in the presence of pain included developing new frequent pain, [49], or the resolution of existing pain.

Table 2

Knee pain associations by feature and quality score

Author	Feature (method)	Knee pain outcome	Adjustment for confounders	Association (magnitude) crude	Association (magnitude) adjusted	Association	Quality score (%)
MRI bone marrow lesion - cohort studies
Foong 2014 [21]	Change in BML size (L) and incident BMLs (L) in all three knee compartments	WOMAC Knee pain severity at 2-year and 10-year visits (L)	Age, sex, BMI, leg strength, and the presence of ROA	NR	Incident or change in total BML size β = 1.53 (95 % CI 0.37 to 2.70.	+	High (67)
Foong 2014 [21]		WOMAC Knee pain severity at 2-year and 10-year visits (L)	Age, sex, BMI, leg strength, and the presence of ROA	NR	Medial tibial change in BML size β = 2.96 (95 % CI 0.59-5.34	Incidence of BML or increase in size associated with increase in pain in the medial tibia	High (67)
Driban 2013 [72]	Knee baseline BML volume (C), BML volume change (L) (TFJ)	48-month change in WOMAC pain (L)	Age, sex, BMI	NR	β = 0.21	+	High (61)
					(standard error 0.07)	Longitudinal (L) changes in BML correlated with (L) changes in pain severity
					p = 0.004
Dore 2010 [124]	MRI BML size (L) regional or whole TFJ over 2.7 years	Change in WOMAC pain (L) over 2.7 years	Age, sex, BMI, leg strength, quality of life, and baseline pain, function	β (95 % CI) Total BML size change = 1.06 (0.10 to 2.03)	β (95 % CI) total BML size change = 1.13 (0.28 to 1.98)	+	High (56)
Kornaat 2007 [173]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML change over 2 years (L) TFJ	Mean WOMAC pain over 2 years	Age, sex and BMI	NR	β (95 % CI) = 2 (−8 to 11)	NA	High (56)
Moisio 2009 [125]	Baseline MRI semi-quantitative BML score (C) TFJ and PFJ	Incident frequent knee pain 2 years after baseline (L)	Age, sex, BMI, BML score, % denuded bone	NR	OR (95 % CI) medial tibia and femur 1.41 (0.86 to 2.33), lateral tibia and femur 1.70 (1.07 to 2.69)	+ Lateral TFJ BML score associated with incident frequent knee pain	High (56)
Sowers 2011 [28]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML, size in TFJ (C)	Increasing WOMAC pain (L)	Nil	Medial and lateral TFJ BMLs both p <0.005	NR	+	Low (53)
Zhang 2011 [126]	Semi-quantitative change in MRI BML size (L) TFJ over 30 months	Incidence of frequent knee pain, and categorical severity (L) over 30 months	Synovitis and effusions	OR (95 % CI) Severity of frequent knee pain OR 3.0 (1.5 to 6.0)	OR (95 % CI) Incident frequent knee pain p for trend = 0.006. Severity of frequent knee pain OR 2.2 (1.0 to 4.7) p = 0.047	+ Ipsilateral association	Low (50)
Wildi 2010 [95]	24-month change in regional TFJ BML score WORMS (L)	24-month change in WOMAC pain (L)	Nil	R <0.15, p >0.067 for all compartments	NR	NA, all compartments had no correlation	Low (50)
Tanamas 2010 [89]	Baseline semi-quantitative MRI BML size (C)	Annual change in WOMAC pain (L)	Nil	NR	NR	NA	Low (50)
MRI bone marrow lesion - cross-sectional studies
Zhai 2006 [135]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	WOMAC pain >1 (C)	Age, BMI, sex, knee strength, chondral defects	NR	OR 1.44, 95 % CI 1.04, 2.00	+	High (79)
Sharma 2014 [133]	Semi-quantitative BML score WORMS TFJ or PFJ (C)	Prevalent frequent knee symptoms (C)	Age, sex, body mass index (BMI), previous knee injury, and previous knee surgery	NR	BMLs in any compartment OR 1.96, 95 % CI 1.38 to 2.77	+ BML association with prevalent knee symptoms	High (71)
Kornaat 2006 [130]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	Chronic pain presence (C)	Age, sex, and BMI	NR	OR 1.13, 95 % 0.41, 3.11, p = 0.76	NA	High (71)
Lo 2009 [131]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (BLOKS) (C)	WOMAC pain (C)	Synovitis, effusion scores	p for trend = 0.0009	p for trend = 0.006	+	High (71)
Stefanik 2014 abstract [134]	BML (WORMS) (C) (patellofemoral joint)	Prevalent knee pain (any pain in last 30 days) and pain VAS (C)	Adjusted for age, sex, BMI, depressive symptoms and TFJ BMLs	NR	Isolated BML of the lateral PFJ, OR (95 % CI) 1.4 (0.9 to 2.0); medial PFJ, OR (95 % CI) 1.1 (0.8 to 1.5). Isolated lateral PFJ BMLs OR 6.6 (1.7 to 11.5)	NC	High (71)
Ratzlaff 2013 [132]	Total BML volume in the femur or tibia (C)	Weight-bearing knee pain WOMAC subscale (C)	Age, sex, BMI, race, and medial minimum joint space width	NR	Total BML volume femur p = 0.003, tibia p = 0.101	+ Femoral NA Tibial	High (71)
Ip 2011 [99]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	WOMAC pain (C)	Age, sex, BMI, OA stage, joint effusion, and meniscal damage	NR	Total WOMAC pain	NC	High (68)
Ip 2011 [99]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	WOMAC pain (C)		NR	R = 0.05, 95 % CI −0.04 to 0.14. Stair climbing pain R = 0.09 (0.00 to 0.18)	NC	High (68)
Torres 2006 [103]	MRI BML (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Pain VAS (C)	Age, BMI	Coefficient 5.00, 95 % CI 3.00 to 7.00	Coefficient 3.72, 95 % CI 1.76 to 5.68	+	High (68)
Kim 2013 [129]	Summary score and severity of MRI BML (WORMS) (C)	WOMAC pain severity or presence of knee pain (C)	Age, sex, BMI, radiographic OA	NR	BML summary score medial TFJ OR 2.33, 95 % CI 1.02 to 5.33, p <0.001	+ Severity of BML is proportional to WOMAC in medial compartment after adjustment	High (64)
Moisio 2009 [125]	Baseline MRI semi-quantitative BML score (C) TFJ and PFJ	Presence of baseline moderate to severe knee pain (C)	Percent denuded bone, age, sex, BMI	NR	Bone marrow lesion score, OR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.63 to 1.44. Not significant in all compartments	NA found on cross-sectional analysis	High (64)
Ratzlaff 2014 [48] Abstract	Median BML volume (PFJ, TFJ) (C)	Stair-climbing knee pain WOMAC (C)	Nil	TFJ p = 0.01, patellofemoral p = 0.01, femur p = 0.02, tibia p = 0.03	NR	+	High (64)
Hayes 2005 [22]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	Chronic pain presence (C)	Nil	p = 0.001	NR	+	High (61)
Ai 2010 [127]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	Pain verbal rating scale (Likert) (C)	Nil	p = 0.33	NR	NA	Low (57)
Bilgici 2010 [128]	MRI BML (WORMS) (C)	WOMAC pain, pain VAS (C)	Nil	WOMAC r = 0.508, p <0.01 Pain VAS r = 0.488, p <0.01	NR	+	Low (57)
Sowers 2003 [29]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	Chronic pain presence (C)	Nil	OR 5.0, 95 % CI 2.4 to 10.5	NR	+	Low (54)
Link 2003 [101]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML (C)	WOMAC pain (C)	Nil	p >0.05	NR	NA	Low (54)
Felson 2001 [96]	Semi-quantitative MRI BMLs (C)	Chronic knee pain presence (C)	Radiographic severity, age, sex, and effusion score	p <0.001	OR 3.31, 95 % CI 1.54 to 7.41	+	Low (54)
Fernandez-Madrid 1994 [97]	Crude presence of MRI BMLs (C)	Crude pain presence (C)	Nil	NR	NR	NA	Low (46)
MRI bone marrow lesion - case−control studies
Javaid 2010 [140]	Baseline semi-quantitative MRI BML size (WORMS) (C) TFJ and PFJ	Incident frequent knee pain after 15 months (L)	Age, sex, race, BMI	NR	Whole knee OR 2.8, 95 % CI 1.2 to 6.5	+	High (76)
Felson 2007 [181]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML size increase (WORMS) (L) TFJ and PFJ	Incident frequent pain at 15 months (L)	Age, sex, race, BMI, quadriceps strength, KL score, malalignment, baseline BML score	OR 4.1, 95 % CI 2.1 to 8.1	OR 3.2, 95 % CI 1.5 to 6.8	+	High (71)
Javaid 2012 [139]	Baseline Semi-quantitative MRI BML, (WORMS) (C) TFJ and PFJ	Presence of frequent knee pain (C) after 2 years	Nil	OR 1.70, 95 % CI 1.08 to	NR	+	Low (59)
Zhao 2010 [105]	Baseline crude presence of MRI BMLs at (C) TFJ	Change in WOMAC Pain (L)	Nil	p = 0.60	NR	NA	Low (56)
Stahl 2011 [41]	Semi-quantitative MRI BML size (WORMS) (L) TFJ	Changes in WOMAC score (L)	Nil	NR	Data not shown	NA	Low (47)
MRI osteophyte – cohort studies
Sowers 2011 [28]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophyte, size in TFJ (C)	Increasing WOMAC pain (L)	Nil	Medial and lateral TFJ BMLs both p <0.001	NR	+	Low (53)
MRI osteophyte - cross-sectional studies
Kornaat 2006 [130]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophyte (C)	Chronic pain presence (C)	Age, sex, BMI	NR	Patellofemoral OR 2.25, 95 % CI 1.06 to 4.77	+	High (71)
Sengupta 2006 [136]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophyte (WORMS) (C)	Pain severity WOMAC, chronic pain (C)	Age, sex, BMI	NR	OR 0.97, 95 % CI 0.86 to 1.10	NA	High (71)
Torres 2006 [103]	MRI osteophyte, (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Pain VAS (C)	Nil	Coefficient 1.18, 95 % CI 0.63 to 1.72	Coefficient 0.50, 95 % CI 0.07 to 0.94	NC	High (68)
Hayes 2005 [22]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophyte (C)	Chronic pain presence (C)	Nil	p <0.001	NR	+	High (61)
Ai 2010 [127]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophytes (C)	Pain verbal rating scale (Likert) (C)	Nil	p = 0.166	NR	NA	Low (57)
Hayashi 2012 [137]	Crude presence of MRI osteophytes (C)	Presence of pain on WOMAC pain subscale (C)	Nil	OR 4.2 to 6.4, p = 0.001-0.011	NR	+	Low (57)
Link 2003 [101]	Semi-quantitative MRI osteophytes (C)	WOMAC pain (C)	Nil	p >0.05	NR	NA	Low (54)
Fernandez-Madrid 1994 [97]	Crude presence of MRI osteophytes (C)	Crude pain presence (C)	Nil	NR	NR	NA	Low (46)
MRI osteophyte - case–control studies
Javaid 2010 [140]	Baseline semi-quantitative MRI osteophyte, size (WORMS) (C) TFJ and PFJ	Incident frequent knee pain after 15 months (L)	Age, sex, race, BMI	NR	Whole knee severe osteophyte OR 4.7, 95 % CI 1.3 to 18	+	High (76)
MRI bone attrition - cross-sectional studies
Hernandez-Molina 2008 [138]	Semi-quantitative MRI bone attrition (WORMS) (C)	Pain severity and nocturnal pain (WOMAC) (C)	Age, sex, BMI, BMLs, effusions and KL grade	OR (95 % CI) pain severity OR 1.6 (1.1 to 2.3), nocturnal pain OR 1.1 (0.5 to 2.1)	OR (95 % CI) pain severity OR 0.9 (0.6 to 1.4), nocturnal pain OR 1.0 (0.5 to 2.1).	NA	High (71)
Torres 2006 [103]	MRI attrition, (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Pain VAS (C)	Nil	Coefficient 3.33, 95 % CI 1.79 to 4.87	Coefficient 1.91, 95 % CI 0.68 to 3.13	+	High (68)
MRI bone attrition - case−control studies
Javaid 2012 [139]	Baseline semi-quantitative MRI attrition size (WORMS) (C) TFJ and PFJ	Presence of frequent knee pain (C) after 2 years	Nil	OR 2.40, 95 % CI 1.51 to 3.83	NR	+	Low (59)
MRI bone shape/dimension - cohort studies
Everhart 2014 [114]	Baseline TFJ subchondral surface ratio of medial and lateral TFJ compartments (C)	Incident frequent knee pain at 48 months, (L)	Sex, race, age, BMI, tobacco use, activity level, knee coronal alignment, baseline symptoms, injury history, surgery history, KL grade, and JSW	NR	Medial SSR OR 0.48, 95 % CI 0.30 to 0.75, p = 0.0009. Lateral SSR OR 1.27, 95 % CI 0.86 to 1.88, p = 0.19	- larger MSSR gets less incident frequent knee pain	High (61)
MRI bone shape/dimension - cross-sectional studies
Ochiai 2010 [47]	MRI irregularity of femoral condyle contour (C)	Knee pain VAS (C)	Nil	Irregularity of femoral condyle contour r = 0.472, p = 0.0021	NR	+	Low (50)
MRI bone cyst - cohort studies
Sowers 2011 [28]	Semi-quantitative MRI bone cyst size in TFJ (C)	Increasing WOMAC pain (L)	Nil	NR	NR analysis described as not significant but data not shown	NA	Low (53)
MRI bone cyst - cross-sectional studies
Kornaat 2006 [130]	Semi-quantitative MRI bone cyst(C)	Chronic pain presence (C)	Nil	NR	Patellofemoral OR 1.83, 95 % CI (0.80 to 4.16)	NA	High (71)
Torres 2006 [103]	MRI bone cyst (WORMS) TFJ and PFJ (C)	Pain VAS (C)	Age, BMI	Coefficient 2.50, 95 % CI −0.38 to 5.38	Coefficient 0.82, 95 % CI −0.50 to 2.14	NA	High (68)
Hayes 2005 [22]	Semi-quantitative MRI bone cyst (C)	Chronic pain presence (C)	Age, sex, and BMI	p <0.001	NR	+	High (61)
Hayashi 2012 [137]	Crude presence of MRI bone cysts (C)	Presence of pain on WOMAC pain subscale (C)	Nil	OR 6.7 to 17.8, p = 0.004 to 0.03	NR	+	Low (57)
Link 2003 [101]	Crude presence of MRI bone cyst (C)	WOMAC pain (C)	Nil	p >0.05	NR	NA	Low (54)
MRI bone cyst - case control studies
Javaid 2010 [140]	Baseline semi-quantitative MRI bone cyst size (WORMS) (C) TFJ and PFJ	Incident frequent knee pain after 15 months (L)	Nil	NR	NR p >0.1	NA	High (76)
Javaid 2012 [139]	Baseline semi-quantitative MRI bone cyst size (WORMS) (C) TFJ and PFJ	Presence of frequent knee pain (C) after 2 years	Nil	OR 1.61, 95 % CI 1.03 to 2.52	NR	+	Low (59)
qCT bone mineral density - cross-sectional studies
Burnett 2012 [57]	BMD of patellar lateral facet (qCT) (C)	WOMAC – knee pain at rest (C)	Nil	Total lateral patella facet p = 0.04, inferior lateral facet p = 0.005	NR		Low (57)
2D Knee bone shape - cross-sectional studies
Haverkamp 2011 [36]	2D Bone shape knee, 1. femur and tibial width, 2. elevation of lateral tibial plateau (C)	Pain severity VAS (C)	Models adjusted for Age, BMI	NR	Bone width p = 0.167, lateral tibia plateau elevation p = 0.002	+ Lateral tibial plateau associated with pain severity, NA bone width with pain severity	Low (46)

Positive correlation reported between bone feature and outcome measure (+); negative correlation reported between bone feature and outcome measure (−). BMI body mass index, BML bone marrow lesion, C a feature or outcome described in cross-section, knee pain on most days for at least the last month (chronic pain) confidence interval (CI), KL Kellgren-Lawrence, L a feature or outcome described longitudinally, NA no association, NC no conclusion could be found for an association between bone feature and outcome measure, NR not reported, OA osteoarthritis, OAI Osteoarthritis Initiative, OR odds ratio, PFJ patellofemoral joint, ROA radiographic osteoarthritis, SSR subchondral surface ratio VAS visual analogue scale, WOMAC Western Ontario and McMaster Universities arthritis index, qCT quantitative computed tomography

Bone marrow lesions

MRI (9 cohort, 18 cross-sectional, 5 case–control studies): in 3 prospective cohort, well-adjusted, high quality analyses the baseline or longitudinal increase in size of BMLs was associated with longitudinally increasing knee WOMAC pain severity [21, 72, 124]. This association was observed in one [28] but not two [89, 95] similar prospective-cohort, unadjusted, lower quality analyses. Baseline BML size in the lateral but not the medial tibiofemoral joint was associated with incident frequent knee pain in a prospective-cohort, well-adjusted, high quality analysis [125]. Longitudinally increasing BML size was associated with incident frequent knee pain in a similar but inadequately adjusted analysis of below average quality [126]. In cross-sectional studies the size or presence of BMLs was inconsistently associated with the presence of a heterogenous range of pain measures, irrespective of adequate covariate adjustment [22, 29, 48, 96, 97, 99, 101, 103, 125, 127–135]. In summary, BMLs are independently associated with longitudinally increasing pain severity and are associated with incident frequent knee pain.

Osteophytes

MRI (one cohort, eight cross-sectional, one case–control study): one prospective cohort, unadjusted, below-average-quality analysis reported increasing baseline osteophyte size was associated with increasing WOMAC pain severity score [28]. In well-adjusted cross-sectional analyses, osteophyte size was associated with the presence [130] but not severity of pain [136]. In unadjusted cross-sectional analyses osteophytes were inconsistently associated with a heterogenous range of pain measures [22, 97, 101, 103, 127, 137]. In summary, osteophytes are associated with longitudinally increasing pain severity and the cross-sectional presence of pain.

Bone attrition

MRI (no cohort, two cross-sectional, one case–control study); cross-sectional analyses found greater attrition was associated with greater pain severity, without covariate adjustment [103, 138], but not after adequate covariate adjustment [138]. An unadjusted case–control analysis found an association between attrition and prevalent pain [139]. In summary, bone attrition is associated, but not independently so, with severity of pain.

Bone shape/dimension

MRI (one cohort, one cross-sectional study): one prospective, well-adjusted, high quality analysis found the femoro-tibial articulating surface mismatch was associated with incident frequent knee pain [114]. One unadjusted cross-sectional analysis found the irregularity of the femoral condyle surface was associated with severity of knee pain [47]. In summary, specific features of bone shape are independently associated with incident frequent knee pain and severity of pain.

Bone cyst

MRI (one cohort, five cross-sectional, two case–control studies): one prospective cohort, unadjusted, low quality analysis found no association between bone cyst size and increasing WOMAC pain score [28]. In mostly unadjusted cross-sectional [22, 101, 103, 130, 137] and case control analyses [139, 140] of heterogenous cyst measures and pain measures, an association between cysts and pain was inconsistently found. In summary, bone cysts may not be associated with longitudinal severity of pain and cross-sectional association with pain is uncertain.

2D Knee bone shape

One inadequately adjusted cross-sectional analysis found an association between the elevation of the lateral tibial plateau and severity of pain [36]. In summary, 2D lateral tibial bone shape is associated with cross-sectional severity of pain.

Relationship between hand bone feature and structural progression

The association between bone features and structural progression is described in Tables 3 and 5.

Table 3

Hand, hip and ankle structural associations by feature and quality grade

Author	Feature (method)	Structural severity or progression outcome	Adjustment for confounders	Association (magnitude) crude	Association (magnitude) adjusted	Association	Quality (score %)
Hand MRI bone marrow lesion case series
Haugen 2014 [141]	BMLs - semi-quantitative at 2^nd to 5^th IPJs (C)	Progression of hand ROA (JSN, KL grade or new erosion) (L)	Age, sex, BMI,	OR 2.73, 95 % CI 1.29 to 5.78	NR	+	High (61)
Haugen 2014 [141]	BMLs - semi-quantitative at 2^nd to 5^th IPJs (C)	Progression of hand ROA (JSN, KL grade or new erosion) (L)	Age, sex, BMI,	OR 2.73, 95 % CI 1.29 to 5.78	NR	Bigger the BML, the more the JSN	High (61)
Hand MRI bone marrow lesion cross-sectional studies
Haugen 2012 Abstract [143] 299	BML (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs	Radiographic JSN grade IPJ (OARSI atlas) (C)	Age, sex,	OR 10.0, 95 % CI 4.2 to 23	OR 4.4, 95 % CI 2.2 to 9.0	+	Low (43)
Haugen 2012 Abstract [143] 299	BML (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs	Radiographic JSN grade IPJ (OARSI atlas) (C)	Age, sex,	OR 10.0, 95 % CI 4.2 to 23	OR 4.4, 95 % CI 2.2 to 9.0	BML score association with more JSN	Low (43)
Haugen 2012 [142]	BML (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs	Hand KL grade of IPJs (C)	Age, sex	NR	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (64)
					BMLs 11 (5.5 to 21)
					p <0.001
Hand MRI osteophyte cross-sectional studies
Haugen 2012 [142]	Osteophyte (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs	Hand KL grade of IPJs (C)	Age, sex	NR	OR (95 % CI)	+	High (64)
					osteophytes
					415 (189 to 908)
					p <0.001
Hand MRI attrition cross-sectional studies
Haugen 2012 [142]	Attrition (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs	Hand KL grade of IPJs (C)	Age, sex	NR	OR (95 % CI) attrition 87 (37 to 204)	+	High (64)
Haugen 2012 [142]	Attrition (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs	Hand KL grade of IPJs (C)	Age, sex	NR	p <0.001	+	High (64)
Hand MRI bone cyst cross-sectional studies
Haugen 2012 [142]	Cyst (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs	Hand KL grade of IPJs (C)	Age, sex	NR	OR (95 % CI)	Nil	High (64)
					cysts 2.0 (0.6 to 6.3)
					p = 0.26
Hip MRI BML cross-sectional studies
Neumann 2007 [46]	Semi-quantitative BMLs (C)	Semi-quantitative cartilage lesions (C)	Nil	R = 0.44, p ≤0.001	NR	+ Correlation between BML and cartilage lesions	Low (43)
Dawson 2013 Abstract [69]	Femoral head BMLs (MRI) (C)	1. Presence of hip OA. 2. Femoral head cartilage volume (MRI) (C)	Age, sex, BMI	NA	OA hip presence	+	Low (14)
					OA hip presence	BMLs associated with diagnosis of hip OA
					OR (95 % CI)
					5.32 (1.78 to 15.9)
					p = 0.003	BMLs inversely associated with cartilage volume
					cartilage volume
					regression coefficient (95 % CI)
					−245.7 mm³
					(−456 to −36) p = 0.02
Hip CT bone morphometry cross-sectional studies
Chiba 2011 [33]	Acetabular and femoral head subchondral trabecular morphometry: bone volume fraction, trabecular thickness, number, separation (CT) (C)	Hip joint space volume (CT) (C)	Nil	Femoral head Bone volume fraction r = −0.691, p <0.001	NR	Joint space narrowing is associated with increased bone volume fraction, trabecular thickening. trabecular number and spacing decrease	Low (57)
Hip DXA BMD cross-sectional studies
Chaganti 2010 [30]	Femoral neck BMD (C) DXA	Hip ROA Modified Croft score (categorical 0–4) (C)	Age, BMI, height, activity level, race, 6-m walk pace, Nottingham muscle strength, inability to do chair stands, and clinic site,	NR	p <0.0001	+	High (64)
Chaganti 2010 [30]	Femoral neck BMD (C) DXA	Hip ROA Modified Croft score (categorical 0–4) (C)		NR	p <0.0001	Higher BMD for higher grade of OA of hip	High (64)
Antoniades 2000 [32]	DXA BMD of the femoral neck of left (nondominant) hip with ROA (C)	Radiographic OA (Croft score) (C)	BMI, lifetime physical activity, menopausal status, use of oestrogen, and smoking	OR 1.63, 95 % CI 1.06 to 2.50)	OR 1.80, 95 % CI 1.05 to 3.12	+ Association between BMD and hip ROA grade in the index hip	High (64)
Antoniades 2000 [32]		Radiographic OA (Croft score) (C)		OR 1.63, 95 % CI 1.06 to 2.50)	OR 1.80, 95 % CI 1.05 to 3.12	Higher OA grade means higher BMD	High (64)
2D Hip bone shape longitudinal studies
Agricola 2013 [146]	Baseline 2D femoral and acetabular shape modes (segmented by statistical shape modelling) (C)	THR at or within 5 years (L)	Age, sex, BMI, shape modes	5 modes were associated with THR OR 1.71 to 2.01, p ≤0.001	3 modes were associated with THR OR 1.78 to 2.10, p ≤0.001	+ Increasing femoral head asphericity is associated with THR	High (72)
Agricola 2013 [147]	Baseline alpha angle (2D femur shape) dichotomous abnormal >60 °, normal ≤60 ° (C)	Incident ROA hip (KL >1), incident end-stage ROA hip (KL >2 or THR) at or within 5 years (L)	Age, sex, BMI, KL grade	OR (95 % CI) Incident ROA hip 6.82 (3.55 to 13.10) p <0.0001	OR (95 % CI) incident ROA hip 2.42 (1.15 to 5.06) p = 0.02, incident severe ROA or THR 3.67 (1.68 to 8.01) p <0.0001	+ Elevated alpha angle is associated with incident end-stage OA hip	High (67)
Agricola 2013 [148]	Baseline 2D centre edge angle (acetabular shape): 25 ° <normal <40 °, undercoverage <25 °, overcoverage >40 ° (C)	Incidence within 5 years of: 1. ROA hip (KL >1), 2. end-stage OA (KL >2 or THR)	Age, sex, BMI, KL grade	OR (95 % CI) overcoverage 0.52 (0.19 to 1.43) p = 0.21, undercoverage 3.64 (1.91 to 6.99) p = 0.00	OR (95 % CI) overcoverage 0.34 (0.13 to 0.87) p = 0.025, undercoverage 5.45 (2.40 to 12.34) p = 0.00	Overcoverage is protective against OA incidence (−). Undercoverage is associated with greater odds of OA incidence and end-stage OA (+)	High (67)
2D and 3D hip bone shape cross-sectional studies
Gosvig 2010 [149]	Categorical hip 2D deformity: 1. normal, 2.‘pistol grip’, 3) deep acetabular socket (C)	Presence of radiographic hip OA (JSW ≤2 mm) (C)	Age, sex, BMI, other hip deformities	NR	RR (95 % CI) pistol grip 2.2 (1.7 to 2.8) p <0.001, deep acetabular socket 2.4 (2.0 to 2.9) p <0.001, normal (p >0.05)	+	Low (50)
Reichenbach 2011 [27]	The presence or absence of any 3D semi-quantitative MRI-defined cam-deformity (C)	Combined femoral and acetabular cartilage thickness (C)	Age, BMI (NB all participants were young men)	Unadjusted mean cartilage thickness difference with CAM deformity −0.24 mm (95 % CI −0.46 to −0.03)	Adjusted mean cartilage thickness difference with CAM deformity −0.19 mm (95 % CI −0.41 to 0.02)	NC	High (64)
2D hip bone shape case control studies
Doherty 2008 [43]	Non-spherical femoral head 2D shape assessment: 1. appearance of ‘pistol grip deformity’ (C), 2. maximum femoral head diameter ratio to minimum parallel femoral neck diameter (C)	Presence of radiographic hip OA (JSW ≤2.5 mm) (C)	Age, sex, BMI, BMD, physical activity, history of hip injury, type 3 hand (index finger shorter than ring finger), hand nodes, and center-edge angle	OR (95 % CI) pistol grip deformity 5.75 (4.00 to 8.27). Femoral head-to-neck ratio 10.45 (7.16 to 15.24)	OR (95 % CI) pistol grip deformity 6.95 (4.64 to 10.41). Femoral head-to-neck ratio 12.08 (8.05 to 18.15)	+	Low (53)
Barr 2012 [150]	2D Shape measures of centre-edge angle (acetabular shape) (C)	THR vs no radiographic progression over 5 years (L)	Age, gender, BMI KL grade, use of walking stick, WOMAC function, duration of pain	OR (95 % CI) mode 2 0.74 (0.50 to 1.10) p >0.05	OR (95 % CI) Mode 2 0.17 (0.04 to 0.71) p <0.05	NB, this model association is inverse and correlates with acetabular shape	High (76)
Nicholls 2011 [39]	CAM deformity; mean modified triangular index height, alpha angle. 2D acetabular dysplasia; mean lateral center edge angle, (C)	Total hip replacement (L)	BMI, age	OR (p value) triangular index 1.131 (0.021). Alpha angle 1.056 (<0.0005). Centre edge angle 0.906 (0.004)	OR (p value) Triangular index 1.291 (0.011). Alpha angle 1.057 (<0.0005). Centre- edge angle 0.887 (0.002)	+ Association of hip replacement with CAM impingement and acetabular dysplasia indicated by these results	High (71)
Ankle scintigraphic subchondral bone cross-sectional studies
Kraus 2013 [60]	Ipsilateral late phase bone scintigraphy, retention presence in tibiotalar joint (C)	Tibiotalar ROA KL grade and JSN (C)	Age, gender, BMI	NR	KL grade r = 0.49, p <0.0001. JSN r = 0.35, p <0.0001	+	High (71)
Knupp 2009 [24]	Late phase bone scintigraphy, semi-quantitative retention scoring of tibiotalar joint (C)	Tibiotalar ankle joint JSN. (modified Takakura score) (C)	Nil	0.62 to 0.75 (p <0.01)	NR	+	Low (57)

Positive correlation was reported between bone feature and outcome measure (+); negative correlation reported between bone feature and outcome measure (−).BMD bone mineral density, BML bone marrow lesion, C a feature or outcome described in cross-section, CT computed tomography, DXA dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, HOAMS Hip osteoarthritis MRI scoring system, IPJ interphalangeal joint, JSN joint space narrowing, JSW joint space width, KL Kellgren-Lawrence, L a feature or outcome described longitudinally, NA no association, NC no conclusion could be found for an association between bone feature and outcome measure, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, PFJ patellofemoral joint, ROA radiographic osteoarthritis, OA osteoarthritis, OARSI Osteoarthritis Research Society International, OR odds ratio, RR relative risk, TFJ tibiofemoral joint, THR total hip replacement, TKR total knee replacement, VAS visual analogue scale, WOMAC Western Ontario and McMaster Universities arthritis index, WORMS whole-organ magnetic resonance imaging score

Bone marrow lesions

MRI (one case series, two cross-sectional studies): one well-adjusted, high quality analysis of a prospective OA case series, found that increasing BML number and size in the interphalangeal joints at baseline conferred greater odds of structural progression of OA [141]. Two adjusted cross-sectional analyses found increasing BML number and size scores were associated with increasing severity of structural progression [142, 143]. In summary, BMLs are independently associated with structural progression of hand OA.

Osteophyte attrition and cysts

One cross-sectional, adjusted analysis found greater MRI attrition or MRI osteophyte number and size was associated with greater structural severity [142]. However, greater presence of cysts observed on MRI was not associated with greater structural severity of OA [142]. In summary, osteophytes and attrition, but not cysts, are associated with structural severity of hand OA.

Relationship between hand bone feature and pain

The association between bone features and pain is described in Tables 4 and 5.

Table 4

Hand and hip pain associations by feature and quality score

Author	Feature (method)	Pain outcome	Adjustment for confounders	Association (magnitude) crude	Association (magnitude) adjusted	Association	Quality score (%)
Hand MRI bone marrow lesion case series
Haugen 2014 Abstract [144]	Sum scores (0–48) for BMLs (Oslo hand OA MRI score) (C)	AUSCAN pain scale (L)	Age, sex, BMI, follow-up time	NR	β = −0.26, 95 % CI −0.55 to 0.03	NA	High (61)
Hand MRI bone marrow lesion cross-sectional studies
Haugen 2012 [145]	BML (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs sum scores	AUSCAN pain scale (C)	Age, sex	NR	OR (95 % CI) 0.96 (0.82 to 1.12)	NA	High (64)
Hand MRI osteophyte cross-sectional studies
Haugen 2012 [145]	Osteophyte (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs sum scores	AUSCAN pain scale (C)	Age, sex	NR	OR (95 % CI) 1.04 (0.98 to 1.10)	NA	High (64)
Hand MRI attrition cross-sectional studies
Haugen 2012 [145]	Attrition (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs sum scores	AUSCAN pain scale (C)	Age, sex	NR	OR (95 % CI) 1.15 (0.98 to 1.34)	NA	High (64)
Hand MRI subchondral cyst cross-sectional studies
Haugen 2012 [145]	Cyst (Oslo MRI hand score) (C) IPJs sum scores	AUSCAN pain scale (C)	Age, sex	NR	OR (95 % CI) 0.93 (0.56 to 1.55)	NA	High (64)
Hand scintigraphy subchondral bone cross-sectional studies
Macfarlane 1993 [61]	Late phase isotope bone scan small joints of the hand (C)	Hand pain VAS (C)	Nil	Correlation coefficient 0.06, p = 0.304	NR	NA	Low (57)
Hip MRI bone marrow lesion cross-sectional studies
Kumar 2013 [151]	Total hip semi-quantitative BML score (C)	Self-reported hip pain HOOS score (C)	Nil	NR	p correlation −0.29 (p <0.01)	A higher BML score means a lower or worse HOOS pain score	High (71)
Maksymowych 2014 [152]	Semi-quantitative BML HIP (HOAMS) (C)	Baseline WOMAC pain (C)	Nil	p <0.001	NR	+	High (64)
Hip MRI subchondral cyst cross-sectional studies
Kumar 2013 [151]	Total hip semi-quantitative subchondral cyst score (C)	Self-reported hip pain HOOS score (C)	Nil	NR	p correlation −0.37 (p <0.001)	A higher cyst score means a lower or worse HOOS pain score	High (71)

Positive correlation reported between bone feature and outcome measure (+); negative correlation reported between bone feature and outcome measure (−). AUSCAN Australian/Canadian Osteoarthritis hand index, BML bone marrow lesion, C a feature or outcome described in cross-section, chronic pain knee pain on most days for at least the last month, HOAMS Hip osteoarthritis MRI scoring system, HOOS Hip dysfunction and osteoarthritis outcome score, IPJ interphalangeal joint, L a feature or outcome described longitudinally, NA no association, NR not recorded, OA osteoarthritis, OR odds ratio, VAS visual analogue scale

Table 5

The summary subchondral bone associations with joint replacement, structural progression and pain in peripheral OA

Subchondral bone feature of OA	Pain and structural associations
Subchondral bone feature of OA	Knee structure	Knee pain	Hand structure	Hand pain	Hip structure	Hip pain	Ankle structure
MRI bone marrow lesions	Progression (i)	LPS (i)	Progression (i)	No LPS (w)	Severity (w)	Severity (n)
		IFP (n)		No LPS (w)
				No severity (n)
	TKR (i)			No severity (n)
MRI osteophytes	Progression (i)	LPS (n)	Severity (n)	No severity (n)
MRI osteophytes	TKR (n)	LPS (n)	Severity (n)	No severity (n)
MRI bone attrition	No progression (0)	No severity (0)	Severity (n)	No severity (n)
MRI bone shape or dimensions	Progression (i)	IFP (i)			No severity (0)
	Progression (i)	Severity (n)
	TKR (i)	Severity (n)
MRI bone cyst	No progression	No LPS (n)	No severity (n)	No severity (n)		Severity (n)
MRI bone cyst	?severity	No LPS (n)	No severity (n)	No severity (n)		Severity (n)
MRI or CT trabecular morphometry	Progression (n)				Severity (n)
DXA or CT Peri-articular BMD	Progression (n)				Severity (w)
2D Bone shape	Severity (w)	Severity (n)			Progression (i)
2D Bone shape	Severity (w)	Severity (n)			THR (i)
Scintigraphy	No Progression (0)			No severity (n)			Severity (w)

CT computed tomography, dual-energy DXA x-ray absorptiometry, (i) independent association, IFP incident frequent pain, (n) association with no or inadequate covariate adjustment, TKR total knee replacement, THR total hip replacement, LPS mean change in longitudinal pain severity, (w) well-adjusted association, (0) association insignificant after covariate adjustment

Bone marrow lesions

MRI (one case series, one cross-sectional study): one well-adjusted, high quality analysis of a prospective OA case series, found that BML number and size at baseline was not associated with longitudinal change in hand pain [144]. One adjusted cross-sectional analysis found no association of BMLs with severity of pain [145]. In summary, BMLs are not independently associated with longitudinal or cross-sectional severity of pain.

Osteophyte attrition and cysts

One cross-sectional, adjusted analysis found no association between bone features, osteophytes, attrition or cysts observed on MRI, and pain severity [145]. In summary, osteophytes, attrition and cysts are not associated with severity of hand pain.

Scintigraphy

Scintigraphy (one cross-sectional study): one cross-sectional unadjusted analysis found no significant association between bone signal in the hands and severity of pain. In summary, bone scintigraphy signal is not associated with severity of pain in hand OA.

Relationship between hip bone feature and structural progression

The association between bone features, and structural progression and joint replacement is described in Tables 3 and 5.

Bone marrow lesions

MRI (two cross-sectional studies): one well-adjusted [69] and one unadjusted [46] cross-sectional analysis both found that BMLs were associated with greater structural severity. In summary, BMLs are associated with structural severity of hip OA.

Trabecular bone morphometry

One unadjusted cross-sectional analysis found greater MRI bone volume fraction, trabecular thickening, trabecular number and lower trabecular spacing were associated with greater structural severity of OA [33]. In summary, bone volume fraction, trabecular thickening, number and spacing are associated with structural severity in hip OA.

Peri-articular bone mineral density

DXA (two cross-sectional studies): one well-adjusted [30] and one adjusted [32] cross-sectional analysis found greater BMD was associated with greater structural severity. In summary, BMD is associated with structural severity of hip OA.

2D and 3D hip bone shape

Hip bone shape (three cohort, two cross-sectional, three case–control studies): in two prospective cohort, well-adjusted, high quality analyses increasing asphericity of the femoral head (measured as an elevated alpha angle, or in shape modes 11 and 15) was associated with total hip replacement (THR) [146] or with structural progression and THR [147] respectively. In one prospective cohort, well-adjusted, high quality analysis, acetabular undercoverage of the femoral head (a low centre-edge angle) was associated with structural progression or THR [148]. In one well-adjusted cross-sectional analysis, 2D asphericity deformity of the femoral head (cam-type deformity) was associated with structural severity [149]. In one well-adjusted cross-sectional analysis of MRI-determined femoral head asphericity in asymptomatic young men, there was a significantly lower cartilage thickness in those with than those without any detectable asphericity. This became insignificant after covariate adjustment [27]. Case–control analyses identified the same associations as the cohort analyses [39, 43, 150]. In summary, asphericity of the femoral head and acetabular undercoverage of the femoral head are independently associated with structural progression and THR.

Relationship between hip bone feature and pain

The association between bone features and pain is described in Tables 4 and 5.

Bone marrow lesions

MRI (two cross-sectional studies): two cross-sectional, unadjusted analyses found that increasing semi-quantitative BML scores were associated with greater severity of pain [151, 152]. In summary, BMLs are associated with severity of pain in hip OA.

Bone cyst

One cross-sectional, unadjusted analysis found that increasing semi-quantitative cyst scores on MRI were associated with greater severity of pain [151]. In summary: cysts are associated with severity of pain in hip OA.

Relationship between ankle bone features and structural progression

The association between bone features and structure is described in Table 3 and 5.

Scintigraphy

Scintigraphy (two cross-sectional studies): one well-adjusted [59] and one unadjusted [62] cross-sectional analysis found the presence or semi-quantitative scoring of late-phase bone signal in the tibiotalar joint was associated with greater structural severity. In summary, bone scintigraphy signal is associated with ankle structural severity.

Discussion

This systematic review is the first to have incorporated quality scoring alongside statistical adjustment in the comprehensive examination of the relationship of subchondral bone pathology with both structural progression of OA and pain for all non-conventional types of radiographic imaging of peripheral joints with OA. This systematic review has concluded that there are independent associations between imaging-assessed bone pathology and structural progression and pain in the knee, hand, and hip.

Subchondral bone pathology may lead to cartilage degeneration by altering the biomechanical force distribution across joint cartilage, or disruption of the osteochondral junction and release of soluble biomediators influencing the cartilage [153, 154]. In OA the homeostatic process of subchondral bone remodeling fails, leading to increased bone turnover, volume and change in stiffness and shock-absorbing capacity [155–157]. BMLs histologically represent increased bone turnover [158]. Cartilage overlying altered bone has been observed to have greater damage than healthy bone in knees from human cadavers [159]. That study, and an excluded study [160], concur with the independent association between BMLs, and structural progression of OA in knees and hands and total knee replacement, as concluded by this analysis. Although randomised control trials were not excluded from this review, several such trials were excluded on the basis of failure to formally quantify any correlation between BMLs and structural progression outcomes. These include the strontium [161], intensive weight-loss therapy [162] and glucosamine [163] trials, and some of these describe a concordant reduction in BML size and cartilage volume loss.

Osteophytes represent subchondral bone hypertrophy typical of OA. They represent endochondral and direct bone formation and create a circumferential increase in bone area around each knee cartilage plate, particularly on the medial side in OA [118], which concurs with the independent association between osteophytes demonstrated on MRI and structural progression as observed in this analysis.

In terms of bone morphology, knee OA is associated with shallow trochlear patellar grooves in multiple epiphyseal dysplasia [164]. These findings concur with the findings of Stefanik and Kalichman, and colleagues in studies of knee OA in this review [115, 116, 165]. Anterior-cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture represents a risk factor for developing knee OA. In cases of ACL tear in previously normal knees of young healthy adults, the 3D shape of the femur, tibia and patella expands more rapidly than in controls without radiographic evidence of knee OA in the subsequent 5 years [166]. The 3D shape of the same knee bones has also been associated with the outcome of joint replacement [167]. This highlights the importance of bone shape and concurs with our conclusion that 3D knee shape and 2D hip shape are independently associated with structural progression of OA and total joint replacement.

We found that bone attrition and cysts were associated with structural progression or severity, but not after covariate adjustment, which included other OA subchondral bone features. This suggests these bone features are an epiphenomenon of the pathogenic process of structural progression rather than a primary cause. This hypothesis is supported by bone cysts and attrition frequently occurring synchronously with BMLs [88, 138] and incident bone attrition has been strongly associated with the presence of BMLs within the same compartment [168].

Increasing bone volume fraction, trabecular number and thickness, but decreasing trabecular spacing on CT and MRI studies were associated with structural progression. These specific associations concur with numerous histological analyses of peripheral joint OA [169–171].

Subchondral bone, particularly BMLs, have been found to be associated with pain in knee, hip and hand OA. However, some analyses, in which pain was measured using heterogenous pain outcomes, report an absence of longitudinal or cross-sectional association with BMLs [101, 172, 173]. Furthermore, previous systematic reviews have concluded moderate association at the most between BMLs and knee pain [7, 14]. With the benefit of incorporating more well-adjusted analyses in this systematic review, we have highlighted that BMLs are independently longitudinally associated with change in severity of pain, but are only associated with incident frequent knee pain. In analyses excluded from the current review, incident knee BMLs predicted incident knee pain in healthy community-based adults at risk of OA [174]. Concurrent trends in reduction of pain and BML size were observed in the zoledronic acid trial [175] and the intensive diet and exercise for arthritis trial [176]. These were not included because they did not make a formal comparison of pain and BMLs. The mechanism by which BMLs may cause pain is unknown but may include subchondral microfractures, angina from a decreased blood supply causing ischaemia, and raised intraosseous pressure [177–179].

The independent association between a mismatch of the femoral and tibial articulating surface areas and incident frequent knee symptoms indicates that bone shape may predict not only the incidence of radiographic knee OA [120], but also symptomatic OA.

In terms of limitations, stratifying observational studies by quality may artificially create relatively high quality studies from a collection of generally low quality studies. However the distribution and summary statistics of quality scores indicate a suitably broad range of quality, particularly in the influential cohort studies with a mean of 54 % and range of 22−83 %. The decision to exclude articles reporting analysis of association that included fewer than 20 patients with OA may seem arbitrary. However, several papers report associations with the presence or absence of pain or structural progression based upon small numbers of patients. Our threshold decision reflects the absence of specific guidelines on how to exclude such papers, with inherent risk of imprecision, in the context of heterogenous populations and statistical analyses. Had these papers been included there would have been no change in any of the conclusions in Table 5 (data not shown). The use of joint replacement as an outcome measure has a number of limitations including the effect of patient willingness, variation in orthopaedic opinion, availability of health services and health insurance, and therefore may be influenced depending upon the country and context in which the study is performed.

Publication bias could not be assessed with a funnel plot as there were insufficient results for odds and relative risk ratios. The heterogenous nature of the measures of bone features and structural or pain outcomes precluded a meta-analysis or calculation of an effect size. This was because there were insufficient analyses describing the same association between the same bone features and outcome measure pair.

Conclusions

In conclusion subchondral bone plays an integral role in the pathogenesis of OA. BMLs, osteophytes identified on MRI and tibial bone area are independently associated with structural progression of knee OA. BMLs and tibial bone area are independently associated with TKR. BMLs are independently associated with structural progression of hand OA and 2D hip bone shape is associated with progression of structural hip OA and THR. BMLs are independently associated with longitudinal change in severity of pain and femorotibial articulating area mismatch is independently associated with incident frequent knee pain. These bone features may be used in the future for targeting treatment, stratifying patients into those most in need of OA modification and measuring treatment response.

Abbreviations

2D:: two-dimensional

3D:: three-dimensional

ACL:: anterior cruciate ligament

BLOKS:: Boston–Leeds osteoarthritis knee score

BMD:: bone mineral density

BMI:: body mass index

BML:: bone marrow lesion

BOKS:: Boston osteoarthritis of the knee study

BVF:: bone volume fraction

Cam:: a resemblance to a camshaft

CRP:: C-reactive protein

CT:: computed tomography

DMOAD:: disease-modifying osteoarthritis drug

DXA:: dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry

EMBASE:: Excerpta Medica database

GARP:: Genetics, osteoarthritis and progression study

HOAMS:: Hip osteoarthritis MRI scoring system

IPJ:: interphalangeal joint

JSN:: joint space narrowing

JSW:: joint space width

KL:: Kellgren-Lawrence

KOSS:: knee osteoarthritis scoring system

MOST:: multicentre osteoarthritis study

MRI:: magnetic resonance imaging

NA:: no association

NC:: no conclusion

OA:: osteoarthritis

OAI:: Osteoarthritis Initiative

OARSI:: Osteoarthritis Research Society International

OR:: odds ratio

PET:: positron emission tomography

PFJ:: patellofemoral joint

PRISMA:: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses

qCT:: quantitative computed tomography

ROA:: radiographic osteoarthritis

RR:: relative risk ratio

SSR:: subchondral surface ratio

THR:: total hip replacement

TFJ:: tibiofemoral joint

TKR:: total knee replacement

VAS:: visual analogue scale

WOMAC:: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities arthritis index

WORMS:: whole-organ magnetic resonance imaging score

Declarations

Acknowledgements

This study has been part funded by Arthritis Research UK (Grant numbers 20154 and 20083) and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) through the Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit. This article/paper/report presents independent research funded by the NIHR. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, the NIHR or the Department of Health.

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)

Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds and NIHR Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Chapeltown Rd, Leeds, LS7 4SA, UK

(2)

Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

(3)

Imorphics Ltd, Kilburn House, Manchester, UK

References

Felson DT, Naimark A, Anderson J, Kazis L, Castelli W, Meenan RF. The prevalence of knee osteoarthritis in the elderly. The Framingham Osteoarthritis Study. Arthritis Rheum. 1987;30:914–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Bijlsma JW, Berenbaum F, Lafeber FP. Osteoarthritis: an update with relevance for clinical practice. Lancet. 2011;377:2115–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
EMA. European Medicines Agency. Guideline on clinical investigation of medicinal products used in the treatment of osteoarthritis. 2010. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003440.pdf
FDA. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry: Clinical development programs for drugs, devices, and biological products intended for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA). 1999. FDA document 07/1999.Google Scholar
Guermazi A, Niu J, Hayashi D, Roemer FW, Englund M, Neogi T, et al. Prevalence of abnormalities in knees detected by MRI in adults without knee osteoarthritis: population based observational study (Framingham Osteoarthritis Study). BMJ. 2012;345.Google Scholar
Barr AJ, Dube B, Hensor EM, Kingsbury SR, Peat G, Bowes MA, et al. The relationship between clinical characteristics, radiographic osteoarthritis and 3D bone area: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:1703–9.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Hunter DJ, Zhang W, Conaghan PG, Hirko K, Menashe L, Li L, et al. Systematic review of the concurrent and predictive validity of MRI biomarkers in OA. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2011;19:557–88.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Conaghan PG, Felson D, Gold G, Lohmander S, Totterman S, Altman R. MRI and non-cartilaginous structures in knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2006;14:A87–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Betancourt MC, Linden JC, Rivadeneira F, Rozendaal RM, Zeinstra SM, Weinans H, et al. Dual energy x-ray absorptiometry analysis contributes to the prediction of hip osteoarthritis progression. Arthritis Res Ther. 2009;11:R162.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Boegard T. Radiography and bone scintigraphy in osteoarthritis of the knee--comparison with MR imaging. Acta Radiol Suppl. 1998;418:7–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Boegard T, Rudling O, Dahlstrom J, Dirksen H, Petersson IF, Jonsson K. Bone scintigraphy in chronic knee pain: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Rheum Dis. 1999;58:20–6.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Temmerman OP, Raijmakers PG, Kloet R, Teule GJ, Heyligers IC, Lammertsma AA. In vivo measurements of blood flow and bone metabolism in osteoarthritis. Rheumatol Int. 2013;33:959–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Johnston JD, Masri BA, Wilson DR. Computed tomography topographic mapping of subchondral density (CT-TOMASD) in osteoarthritic and normal knees: methodological development and preliminary findings. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2009;17:1319–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Yusuf E, Kortekaas MC, Watt I, Huizinga TW, Kloppenburg M. Do knee abnormalities visualised on MRI explain knee pain in knee osteoarthritis? A systematic review. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70:60–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283:2008–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L. Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28:1290–9.Google Scholar
Aitken D, Khan HI, Ding C, Blizzard L, Pelletier JP, Martel-Pelletier J, et al. Structural predictors of ten year knee cartilage volume loss. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65:S97–8.Google Scholar
Ding C, Cicuttini F, Scott F, Cooley H, Boon C, Jones G. Natural history of knee cartilage defects and factors affecting change. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:651–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Ding C, Garnero P, Cicuttini F, Scott F, Cooley H, Jones G. Knee cartilage defects: association with early radiographic osteoarthritis, decreased cartilage volume, increased joint surface area and type II collagen breakdown. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005;13:198–205.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Ding C, Martel-Pelletier J, Pelletier JP, Abram F, Raynauld JP, Cicuttini F, et al. Two-year prospective longitudinal study exploring the factors associated with change in femoral cartilage volume in a cohort largely without knee radiographic osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2008;16:443–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Foong YC, Khan HI, Blizzard L, Ding C, Cicuttini F, Jones G, et al. The clinical significance, natural history and predictors of bone marrow lesion change over eight years. Arthritis Res Ther. 2014;16:R149.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Hayes CW, Jamadar DA, Welch GW, Jannausch ML, Lachance LL, Capul DC, et al. Osteoarthritis of the knee: comparison of MR imaging findings with radiographic severity measurements and pain in middle-aged women. Radiology. 2005;237:998–1007.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Jones G, Ding C, Scott F, Glisson M, Cicuttini F. Early radiographic osteoarthritis is associated with substantial changes in cartilage volume and tibial bone surface area in both males and females. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2004;12:169–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Knupp M, Pagenstert GI, Barg A, Bolliger L, Easley ME, Hintermann B. SPECT-CT compared with conventional imaging modalities for the assessment of the varus and valgus malaligned hindfoot. J Orthop Res. 2009;27:1461–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Koster IM, Oei EHG, Hensen JHJ, Boks SS, Koes BW, Vroegindeweij D, et al. Predictive factors for new onset or progression of knee osteoarthritis one year after trauma: MRI follow-up in general practice. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:1509–16.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
McCauley TR, Kornaat PR, Jee WH. Central osteophytes in the knee: prevalence and association with cartilage defects on MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176:359–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Reichenbach S, Leunig M, Werlen S, Nuesch E, Pfirrmann CW, Bonel H, et al. Association between cam-type deformities and magnetic resonance imaging-detected structural hip damage: a cross-sectional study in young men. Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63:4023–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Sowers M, Karvonen-Gutierrez CA, Jacobson JA, Jiang Y, Yosef M. Associations of anatomical measures from MRI with radiographically defined knee osteoarthritis score, pain, and physical functioning. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:241–51.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Sowers MF, Hayes C, Jamadar D, Capul D, Lachance L, Jannausch M, et al. Magnetic resonance-detected subchondral bone marrow and cartilage defect characteristics associated with pain and x-ray-defined knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2003;11:387–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Chaganti RK, Parimi N, Lang T, Orwoll E, Stefanick ML, Nevitt M, et al. Bone mineral density and prevalent osteoarthritis of the hip in older men for the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study Group. Osteoporos Int. 2010;21:1307–16.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Akamatsu Y, Kobayashi H, Kusayama Y, Kumagai K, Mitsugi N, Saito T. Does subchondral sclerosis protect progression of joint space narrowing in patients with varus knee osteoarthritis? Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22.Google Scholar
Antoniades L, MacGregor AJ, Matson M, Spector TD. A cotwin control study of the relationship between hip osteoarthritis and bone mineral density. Arthritis Rheum. 2000;43:1450–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Chiba K, Ito M, Osaki M, Uetani M, Shindo H. In vivo structural analysis of subchondral trabecular bone in osteoarthritis of the hip using multi-detector row CT. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2011;19:180–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Chiba K, Uetani M, Kido Y, Ito M, Okazaki N, Taguchi K, et al. Osteoporotic changes of subchondral trabecular bone in osteoarthritis of the knee: a 3-T MRI study. Osteoporosis Int. 2012;23:589–97.Google Scholar
Guymer E, Baranyay F, Wluka AE, Hanna F, Bell RJ, Davis SR, et al. A study of the prevalence and associations of subchondral bone marrow lesions in the knees of healthy, middle-aged women. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007;15:1437–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Haverkamp DJ, Schiphof D, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Weinans H, Waarsing JH. Variation in joint shape of osteoarthritic knees. Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63:3401–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Mazzuca A, Brandt D, Schauwecker S, Buckwalter A, Katz P, Meyer M, et al. Bone scintigraphy is not a better predictor of progression of knee osteoarthritis than Kellgren and Lawrence grade. J Rheumatol. 2004;31:329–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Mazzuca A, Brandt D, Schauwecker S, Katz P, Meyer M, Lane A, et al. Severity of joint pain and Kellgren-Lawrence grade at baseline are better predictors of joint space narrowing than bone scintigraphy in obese women with knee osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol. 2005;32:1540–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Nicholls AS, Kiran A, Pollard TC, Hart DJ, Arden CP, Spector T, et al. The association between hip morphology parameters and nineteen-year risk of end-stage osteoarthritis of the hip: a nested case–control study. Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63:3392–400.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Okazaki N, Chiba K, Kidera K, Yonekura A, Osaki M. Relationship between subchondral bone cysts, the severity of knee osteoarthritis, and alignments of lower extremities. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:S370–1.Google Scholar
Stahl R, Jain SK, Lutz J, Wyman BT, Le MPM, Vignon E, et al. Osteoarthritis of the knee at 3.0 T: comparison of a quantitative and a semi-quantitative score for the assessment of the extent of cartilage lesion and bone marrow edema pattern in a 24-month longitudinal study. Skeletal Radiology. 2011;40:1315–27.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Bruyere O, Dardenne C, Lejeune E, Zegels B, Pahaut A, Richy F, et al. Subchondral tibial bone mineral density predicts future joint space narrowing at the medial femoro-tibial compartment in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Bone. 2003;32:541–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Doherty M, Courtney P, Doherty S, Jenkins W, Maciewicz RA, Muir K, et al. Nonspherical femoral head shape (pistol grip deformity), neck shaft angle, and risk of hip osteoarthritis: a case–control study. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:3172–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Hochberg MC, Yip A, Favors K, Sorkin J, Martel-Pelletier J, Pelletier JP. Features assessed on magnetic resonance images improve prediction of total knee arthroplasty in subjects with symptomatic radiographic knee osteoarthritis: Data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:S175.Google Scholar
Liu L, Kaneko H, Sadatsuki R, Hada S, Yusup A, Kinoshita M, et al. MRI-detected osteophyte is a predictor for receiving total knee arthroplasty in patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:S470–1.Google Scholar
Neumann G, Mendicuti AD, Zou KH, Minas T, Coblyn J, Winalski CS, et al. Prevalence of labral tears and cartilage loss in patients with mechanical symptoms of the hip: evaluation using MR arthrography. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007;15:909–17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Ochiai N, Sasho T, Tahara M, Watanabe A, Matsuki K, Yamaguchi S, et al. Objective assessments of medial osteoarthritic knee severity by MRI: new computer software to evaluate femoral condyle contours. Int Orthop. 2010;34:811–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Ratzlaff C, Russell R, Duryea J. Quantitatively-measured bone marrow lesions in the patellofemoral joint: Distribution and association with pain. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:S247–8.Google Scholar
Driban JB, Price LL, Tassinari AM, Lo GH, McAlindon TE. Peri-articular apparent bone volume fraction is associated with numerous patient characteristics in knees with osteoarthritis: Data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63.Google Scholar
Driban JB, Price LL, Tassinari AM, Lo GH, Schneider E, McAlindon TE. Trabecular morphology is associated with numerous patient characteristics in knees with osteoarthritis: Data from the osteoarthritis initiative (OAI). Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2011;19:s169.Google Scholar
Altman RD, Hochberg M, Murphy Jr WA, Wolfe F, Lequesne M. Atlas of individual radiographic features in osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1995;3:3–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Dore D, Quinn S, Ding C, Winzenberg T, Jones G. Correlates of subchondral BMD: a cross-sectional study. J Bone Miner Res. 2009;24:2007–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Lo GH, Schneider E, Price L, Driban J, Tassinari A, Nevitt M, et al. Periarticular bone density and trabecular morphology predict knee OA structural progression. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012;20:S76.Google Scholar
Lo GH, Tassinari AM, Driban JB, Price LL, Schneider E, Majumdar S, et al. Cross-sectional DXA and MR measures of tibial periarticular bone associate with radiographic knee osteoarthritis severity. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012;20:686–93.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Lo GH, Zhang Y, McLennan C, Niu J, Kiel DP, McLean RR, et al. The ratio of medial to lateral tibial plateau bone mineral density and compartment-specific tibiofemoral osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2006;14:984–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Bennell KL, Creaby MW, Wrigley TV, Hunter DJ. Tibial subchondral trabecular volumetric bone density in medial knee joint osteoarthritis using peripheral quantitative computed tomography technology. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:2776–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Burnett WK, McLennan SA, Wheaton CE, Talmo D, Hunter C, Wilson DJ, et al. Patella Bone density is lower in knee osteoarthritis patients experiencing pain at rest. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012;20:S200–1.Google Scholar
Dieppe P, Cushnaghan J, Young P, Kirwan J. Prediction of the progression of joint space narrowing in osteoarthritis of the knee by bone scintigraphy. Ann Rheum Dis. 1993;52:557.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Kraus VB, McDaniel G, Worrell TW, Feng S, Vail TP, Varju G, et al. Association of bone scintigraphic abnormalities with knee malalignment and pain. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68:1673.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Kraus VB, Worrell TW, Renner JB, Coleman RE, Pieper CF. High prevalence of contralateral ankle abnormalities in association with knee osteoarthritis and malalignment. Osteoarthritis and cartilage/OARS, Osteoarthritis Research Society. 2013;21:1693.Google Scholar
Macfarlane DG, Buckland-Wright JC, Lynch J, Fogelman L. A study of the early and late 99technetium scintigraphic images and their relationship to symptoms in osteoarthritis of the hands. Br J Rheumatol. 1993;32:977–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
McCrae F, Shouls J, Dieppe P, Watt I. Scintigraphic assessment of osteoarthritis of the knee joint. Ann Rheum Dis. 1992;51:938.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Baranyay FJ, Wang Y, Wluka AE, English DR, Giles GG, Sullivan RO, et al. Association of bone marrow lesions with knee structures and risk factors for bone marrow lesions in the knees of clinically healthy, community-based adults. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2007;37:112–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Meredith DS, Losina E, Neumann G, Yoshioka H, Lang PK, Katz JN. Empirical evaluation of the inter-relationship of articular elements involved in the pathoanatomy of knee osteoarthritis using magnetic resonance imaging. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2009;10.Google Scholar
Stehling C, Lane NE, Nevitt MC, Lynch J, McCulloch CE, Link TM. Subjects with higher physical activity levels have more severe focal knee lesions diagnosed with 3T MRI: Analysis of a non-symptomatic cohort of the osteoarthritis initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2010;18:776–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Wang Y, Wluka AE, Cicuttini FM. The determinants of change in tibial plateau bone area in osteoarthritic knees: a cohort study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2005;7:R687–93.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Davies-Tuck ML, Wluka AE, Forbes A, Wang Y, English DR, Giles GG, et al. Development of bone marrow lesions is associated with adverse effects on knee cartilage while resolution is associated with improvement--a potential target for prevention of knee osteoarthritis: a longitudinal study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2010;12:R10.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Dore D, Quinn S, Ding C, Winzenberg T, Cicuttini F, Jones G. Subchondral bone and cartilage damage: a prospective study in older adults. Arthritis Rheum. 2010;62:1967–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Dawson L, Bennell K, Wluka A, Wang Y, Cicuttini F. Hip bone marrow lesions in asymptomatic and osteoarthritic adults: Prevalence, risk factors and significance. Osteoarthritis and cartilage / OARS, Osteoarthritis Research. Society. 2013;21:S241.Google Scholar
Felson DT, McLaughlin S, Goggins J, LaValley MP, Gale ME, Totterman S, et al. Bone marrow edema and its relation to progression of knee osteoarthritis. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:330–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Crema MD, Cibere J, Sayre EC, Roemer FW, Wong H, Thorne A, et al. The relationship between subchondral sclerosis detected with MRI and cartilage loss in a cohort of subjects with knee pain: the knee osteoarthritis progression (KOAP) study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:540–6.Google Scholar
Driban JB, Price LL, Lo GH, Pang J, Hunter DJ, Miller E, et al. Evaluation of bone marrow lesion volume as a knee osteoarthritis biomarker - longitudinal relationships with pain and structural changes: Data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative. Arthritis Res Ther. 2013;15.Google Scholar
Guermazi A, Eckstein F, Hayashi D, Roemer FW, Wirth W, Yang T, et al. Cartilage damage, bone marrow lesions and meniscal lesions predict quantitatively measured loss of cartilage over 30 months: The most study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:S356.Google Scholar
Raynauld JP, Martel-Pelletier J, Dorais M, Haraoui B, Choquette D, Abram F, et al. Total knee replacement as a knee osteoarthritis outcome: predictors derived from a 4-year long-term observation following a randomized clinical trial using chondroitin sulfate. Cartilage. 2013;4:219–26.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Raynauld JP, Martel-Pelletier J, Haraoui B, Choquette D, Dorais M, Wildi LM, et al. Risk factors predictive of joint replacement in a 2-year multicentre clinical trial in knee osteoarthritis using MRI: Results from over 6 years of observation. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70:1382–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Dore D, Martens A, Quinn S, Ding C, Winzenberg T, Zhai G, et al. Bone marrow lesions predict site-specific cartilage defect development and volume loss: a prospective study in older adults. Arthritis Res Ther. 2010;12:R222.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Carrino JA, Blum J, Parellada JA, Schweitzer ME, Morrison WB. MRI of bone marrow edema-like signal in the pathogenesis of subchondral cysts. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2006;14:1081–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Crema MD, Felson DT, Roemer FW, Wang K, Marra MD, Nevitt MC, et al. Prevalent cartilage damage and cartilage loss over time are associated with incident bone marrow lesions in the tibiofemoral compartments: the MOST study. Osteoarthritis and cartilage / OARS, Osteoarthritis Research Society. 2013;21:306–13.Google Scholar
Driban JB, Lo GH, Lee JY, Ward RJ, Miller E, Pang J, et al. Quantitative bone marrow lesion size in osteoarthritic knees correlates with cartilage damage and predicts longitudinal cartilage loss. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011;12:217.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Driban JB, Pang J, Miller E, Destenaves G, Lo GH, Ward RJ, et al. Quantitative bone marrow lesion changes relate to cartilage parameter changes. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012;20:S217–8.Google Scholar
Hernandez-Molina G, Guermazi A, Niu J, Gale D, Goggins J, Amin S, et al. Central bone marrow lesions in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis and their relationship to anterior cruciate ligament tears and cartilage loss. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:130–6.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Kothari A, Guermazi A, Chmiel JS, Dunlop D, Song J, Almagor O, et al. Within-subregion relationship between bone marrow lesions and subsequent cartilage loss in knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res. 2010;62:198–203.Google Scholar
Parsons CEMH, Bruye`re O, Belissa P, Genant HK, Guermazi A, Roemer F, et al. Impact of bone marrow lesion on the progression of knee osteoarthritis in the sekoia study. Rheumatology. 2014;53:i130.Google Scholar
Pelletier JP, Raynauld JP, Berthiaume MJ, Abram F, Choquette D, Haraoui B, et al. Risk factors associated with the loss of cartilage volume on weight-bearing areas in knee osteoarthritis patients assessed by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging: a longitudinal study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2007;9.Google Scholar
Raynauld JP, Martel-Pelletier J, Berthiaume MJ, Abram F, Choquette D, Haraoui B, et al. Correlation between bone lesion changes and cartilage volume loss in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee as assessed by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging over a 24-month period. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;67:683–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Roemer FW, Kwoh CK, Hannon MJ, Green SM, Jakicic JM, Boudreau R, et al. Risk factors for magnetic resonance imaging-detected patellofemoral and tibiofemoral cartilage loss during a six-month period: the joints on glucosamine study. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64:1888–98.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Scher C, Craig J, Nelson F. Bone marrow edema in the knee in osteoarthrosis and association with total knee arthroplasty within a three-year follow-up. Skeletal Radiol. 2008;37:609–17.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Tanamas SK, Wluka AE, Pelletier JP, Martel-Pelletier J, Abram F, Wang Y, et al. The association between subchondral bone cysts and tibial cartilage volume and risk of joint replacement in people with knee osteoarthritis: a longitudinal study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2010;12:R58.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Tanamas SK, Wluka AE, Pelletier JP, Pelletier JM, Abram F, Berry PA, et al. Bone marrow lesions in people with knee osteoarthritis predict progression of disease and joint replacement: a longitudinal study. Rheumatology. 2010;49:2413–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Roemer FW, Guermazi A, Javaid MK, Lynch JA, Niu J, Zhang Y, et al. Change in MRI-detected subchondral bone marrow lesions is associated with cartilage loss: the MOST Study. A longitudinal multicentre study of knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68:1461–5.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Hunter DJ, Zhang Y, Niu J, Goggins J, Amin S, LaValley MP, et al. Increase in bone marrow lesions associated with cartilage loss: a longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging study of knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54:1529–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Kubota M, Ishijima M, Kurosawa H, Liu L, Ikeda H, Osawa A, et al. A longitudinal study of the relationship between the status of bone marrow abnormalities and progression of knee osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sci. 2010;15:641–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Madan-Sharma R, Kloppenburg M, Kornaat PR, Botha-Scheepers SA, Le MPH, Bloem JL, et al. Do MRI features at baseline predict radiographic joint space narrowing in the medial compartment of the osteoarthritic knee 2 years later? Skeletal Radiol. 2008;37:805–11.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Roemer FW, Zhang Y, Niu J, Lynch JA, Crema MD, Marra MD, et al. Tibiofemoral joint osteoarthritis: Risk factors for MR-depicted fast cartilage loss over a 30-month period in the multicenter osteoarthritis study. Radiology. 2009;252:772–80.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Wildi LM, Raynauld JP, Martel-Pelletier J, Abram F, Dorais M, Pelletier JP. Relationship between bone marrow lesions, cartilage loss and pain in knee osteoarthritis: results from a randomised controlled clinical trial using MRI. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69:2118–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Felson DT, Chaisson CE, Hill CL, Totterman SM, Gale ME, Skinner KM, et al. The association of bone marrow lesions with pain in knee osteoarthritis. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:541–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Fernandez-Madrid F, Karvonen RL, Teitge RA, Miller PR, Negendank WG. MR features of osteoarthritis of the knee. Magn Reson Imaging. 1994;12:703–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Gudbergsen H, Lohmander LS, Jones G, Christensen R, Bartels EM, Danneskiold-Samsoe B, et al. Correlations between radiographic assessments and MRI features of knee osteoarthritis - a cross-sectional study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21:535–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Ip S, Sayre EC, Guermazi A, Nicolaou S, Wong H, Thorne A, et al. Frequency of bone marrow lesions and association with pain severity: results from a population-based symptomatic knee cohort. J Rheumatol. 2011;38:1079–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Kornaat PR, Watt I, Riyazi N, Kloppenburg M, Bloem JL. The relationship between the MRI features of mild osteoarthritis in the patellofemoral and tibiofemoral compartments of the knee. Eur Radiol. 2005;15:1538–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Link TM, Steinbach LS, Ghosh S, Ries M, Lu Y, Lane N, et al. Osteoarthritis: MR imaging findings in different stages of disease and correlation with clinical findings. Radiology. 2003;226:373–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Lo GH, Hunter DJ, Zhang Y, McLennan CE, Lavalley MP, Kiel DP, et al. Bone marrow lesions in the knee are associated with increased local bone density. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52:2814–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Torres L, Dunlop DD, Peterfy C, Guermazi A, Prasad P, Hayes KW, et al. The relationship between specific tissue lesions and pain severity in persons with knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2006;14:1033–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Ratzlaff C, Rusell RL, Kwoh K, Hannon M, Grago J, Guermazi A, et al. Quantitative MRI measures of bone marrow lesion volume predict total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:S238–9.Google Scholar
Zhao J, Li X, Bolbos RI, Link TM, Majumdar S. Longitudinal assessment of bone marrow edema-like lesions and cartilage degeneration in osteoarthritis using 3 T MR T1rho quantification. Skeletal Radiol. 2010;39:523–31.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
de Lange BJ, Ioan-Facsinay A, Bijsterbosch J, Van G, Zuurmond A, Kornaat P, et al. The patellofemoral and femorotibial joints are related based on patterns of MRI features and their association with radiologic progression. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:S254–5.Google Scholar
Frobell RB, Nevitt MC, Hudelmaier M, Wirth W, Wyman BT, Benichou O, et al. Femorotibial subchondral bone area and regional cartilage thickness: a cross-sectional description in healthy reference cases and various radiographic stages of osteoarthritis in 1,003 knees from the Osteoarthritis Initiative. Arthritis Care Res. 2010;62:1612–23.Google Scholar
Roemer FW, Guermazi A, Niu J, Zhang Y, Mohr A, Felson DT. Prevalence of magnetic resonance imaging-defined atrophic and hypertrophic phenotypes of knee osteoarthritis in a population-based cohort. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64:429–37.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Neogi T, Felson D, Niu J, Lynch J, Nevitt M, Guermazi A, et al. Cartilage loss occurs in the same subregions as subchondral bone attrition: a within-knee subregion-matched approach from the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61:1539–44.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Reichenbach S, Guermazi A, Niu J, Neogi T, Hunter DJ, Roemer FW, et al. Prevalence of bone attrition on knee radiographs and MRI in a community-based cohort. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2008;16:1005–10.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Cicuttini FM, Jones G, Forbes A, Wluka AE. Rate of cartilage loss at two years predicts subsequent total knee arthroplasty: a prospective study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63:1124–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Davies-Tuck ML, Wluka AE, Wang Y, Teichtahl AJ, Jones G, Ding C, et al. The natural history of cartilage defects in people with knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2008;16:337–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Carnes J, Stannus O, Cicuttini F, Ding C, Jones G. Knee cartilage defects in a sample of older adults: natural history, clinical significance and factors influencing change over 2.9 years. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012;20:1541–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Everhart JS, Siston RA, Flanigan DC. Tibiofemoral subchondral surface ratio (SSR) is a predictor of osteoarthritis symptoms and radiographic progression: data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI). Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:771–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Kalichman L, Zhang Y, Niu J, Goggins J, Gale D, Felson DT, et al. The association between patellar alignment and patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis features - an MRI study. Rheumatology. 2007;46:1303–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Stefanik JJ, Roemer FW, Zumwalt AC, Zhu Y, Gross KD, Lynch JA, et al. Association between measures of trochlear morphology and structural features of patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis on MRI: the MOST study. J Orthopaedic Res. 2012;30:1–8.Google Scholar
Eckstein F, Wirth W, Hunter DJ, Guermazi A, Kwoh CK, Nelson DR, et al. Magnitude and regional distribution of cartilage loss associated with grades of joint space narrowing in radiographic osteoarthritis - data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI). Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2010;18:760–8.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Bowes MA, Vincent GR, Wolstenholme CB, Conaghan PG. A novel method for bone area measurement provides new insights into osteoarthritis and its progression. Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74:519–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Hunter DJ, Bowes M, Boudreau RM, Hannon MJ, Kwohx KC. Does bone shape predict the development of incident knee oa? Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21.Google Scholar
Neogi T, Bowes MA, Niu JB, De Souza KM, Vincent GR, Goggins J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-based three-dimensional bone shape of the knee predicts onset of knee osteoarthritis: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65:2048–58.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Wluka AE, Wang Y, Davis SR, Cicuttini FM. Tibial plateau size is related to grade of joint space narrowing and osteophytes in healthy women and in women with osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64:1033–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Crema MD, Roemer FW, Marra MD, Niu J, Lynch JA, Felson DT, et al. Contrast-enhanced MRI of subchondral cysts in patients with or at risk for knee osteoarthritis: the MOST study. Eur J Radiol. 2010;75:e92–6.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Lindsey CT, Narasimhan A, Adolfo JM, Jin H, Steinbach LS, Link T, et al. Magnetic resonance evaluation of the interrelationship between articular cartilage and trabecular bone of the osteoarthritic knee. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2004;12:86–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Dore D, Quinn S, Ding C, Winzenberg T, Zhai G, Cicuttini F, et al. Natural history and clinical significance of MRI-detected bone marrow lesions at the knee: a prospective study in community dwelling older adults. Arthritis Res Ther. 2010;12:R223.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Moisio K, Eckstein F, Chmiel JS, Guermazi A, Prasad P, Almagor O, et al. Denuded subchondral bone and knee pain in persons with knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;60:3703–10.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Zhang Y, Nevitt M, Niu J, Lewis C, Torner J, Guermazi A, et al. Fluctuation of knee pain and changes in bone marrow lesions, effusions, and synovitis on magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63:691–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Ai F, Yu C, Zhang W, Morelli JN, Kacher D, Li X. MR imaging of knee osteoarthritis and correlation of findings with reported patient pain. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2010;30:248–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Bilgici A, Dogan C, Cil E, Sakarya S, Kuru O, Selcuk MB. Relationship between pain severity and magnetic resonance imaging features in patients with osteoarthritis of the Knee [Turkish]. Turkish J Rheumatol. 2010;25:184–90.Google Scholar
Kim IJ, Kim DH, Jung JY, Song YW, Guermazi A, Crema MD, et al. Association between bone marrow lesions detected by magnetic resonance imaging and knee pain in community residents in Korea. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21:1207–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Kornaat PR, Bloem JL, Ceulemans RY, Riyazi N, Rosendaal FR, Nelissen RG, et al. Osteoarthritis of the knee: association between clinical features and MR imaging findings. Radiology. 2006;239:811–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Lo GH, McAlindon TE, Niu J, Zhang Y, Beals C, Dabrowski C, et al. Bone marrow lesions and joint effusion are strongly and independently associated with weight-bearing pain in knee osteoarthritis: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2009;17:1562–9.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Ratzlaff C, Guermazi A, Collins J, Katz JN, Losina E, Vanwyngaarden C, et al. A rapid, novel method of volumetric assessment of MRI-detected subchondral bone marrow lesions in knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21:806–14.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Sharma L, Chmiel JS, Almagor O, Dunlop D, Guermazi A, Bathon JM, et al. Significance of preradiographic magnetic resonance imaging lesions in persons at increased risk of knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014;66:1811–9.Google Scholar
Stefanik J, Gross K, Felson D, Niu J, Zhang Y, Lewis C, et al. Does medial patellofemoral osteoarthritis matter? the relation of MRI-detected structural damage in the medial and lateral patellofemoral joint to knee pain: the MOST and Framingham osteoarthritis studies. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:S54–5.Google Scholar
Zhai G, Blizzard L, Srikanth V, Ding C, Cooley H, Cicuttini F, et al. Correlates of knee pain in older adults: Tasmanian older adult cohort study. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;55:264–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Sengupta M, Zhang YQ, Niu JB, Guermazi A, Grigorian M, Gale D, et al. High signal in knee osteophytes is not associated with knee pain. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2006;14:413–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Hayashi D, Xu L, Roemer FW, Hunter DJ, Li L, Katur AM, et al. Detection of osteophytes and subchondral cysts in the knee with use of tomosynthesis. Radiology. 2012;263:206–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Hernandez-Molina G, Neogi T, Hunter DJ, Niu J, Guermazi A, Reichenbach S, et al. The association of bone attrition with knee pain and other MRI features of osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;67:43–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Javaid MK, Kiran A, Guermazi A, Kwoh CK, Zaim S, Carbone L, et al. Individual magnetic resonance imaging and radiographic features of knee osteoarthritis in subjects with unilateral knee pain: The health, aging, and body composition study. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64:3246–55.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Javaid MK, Lynch JA, Tolstykh I, Guermazi A, Roemer F, Aliabadi P, et al. Pre-radiographic MRI findings are associated with onset of knee symptoms: the MOST study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2010;18:323–8.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Haugen IK, Slatkowsky-Christensen B, Boyesen P, Sesseng S, van der Heijde D, Kvien TK. MRI findings predict radiographic progression and development of erosions in hand osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014.Google Scholar
Haugen IK, Boyesen P, Slatkowsky-Christensen B, Sesseng S, van der Heijde D, Kiven TK. Comparison of features by MRI and radiographs of the interphalangeal finger joints in patients with hand osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71:345–50.Google Scholar
Haugen IK, BÃ¸yesen P, Slatkowsky-Christensen B, Sesseng S, van der Heijde D, Kiven TK. Associations between radiographic and clinical osteoarthritis features and MRI-defined bone marrow lesions in the finger joints. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71:299.Google Scholar
Haugen IK, Slatkowsky-Christensen B, Sesseng S, Kiven TK. Predictive value of MRI-defined synovitis, bone marrow lesions and central erosions on pain and physical function in hand osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:S386.Google Scholar
Haugen IK, Boyesen P, Slatkowsky-Christensen B, Sesseng S, van der Heijde D, Kvien TK. Associations between MRI-defined synovitis, bone marrow lesions and structural features and measures of pain and physical function in hand osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71:899–904.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Agricola R, Reijman M, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Verhaar JA, Weinans H, Waarsing JH. Total hip replacement but not clinical osteoarthritis can be predicted by the shape of the hip: a prospective cohort study (CHECK). Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21:559–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Agricola R, Heijboer MP, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Verhaar JA, Weinans H, Waarsing JH. Cam impingement causes osteoarthritis of the hip: a nationwide prospective cohort study (CHECK). Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:918–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Agricola R, Heijboer MP, Roze RH, Reijman M, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Verhaar JA, et al. Pincer deformity does not lead to osteoarthritis of the hip whereas acetabular dysplasia does: acetabular coverage and development of osteoarthritis in a nationwide prospective cohort study (CHECK). Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21:1514–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Gosvig KK, Jacobsen S, Sonne-Holm S, Palm H, Troelsen A. Prevalence of malformations of the hip joint and their relationship to sex, groin pain, and risk of osteoarthritis: a population-based survey. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92:1162–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Barr RJ, Gregory JS, Reid DM, Aspden RM, Yoshida K, Hosie G, et al. Predicting OA progression to total hip replacement: can we do better than risk factors alone using active shape modelling as an imaging biomarker? Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012;51:562–70.Google Scholar
Kumar D, Wyatt CR, Lee S, Nardo L, Link TM, Majumdar S, et al. Association of cartilage defects, and other MRI findings with pain and function in individuals with mild-moderate radiographic hip osteoarthritis and controls. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21:1685–92.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Maksymowych WP, Cibere J, Loeuille D, Weber U, Zubler V, Roemer FW, et al. Preliminary validation of 2 magnetic resonance image scoring systems for osteoarthritis of the hip according to the OMERACT filter. J Rheumatol. 2014;41:370–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Radin EL, Rose RM. Role of subchondral bone in the initiation and progression of cartilage damage. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986;34–40.Google Scholar
Suri S, Walsh DA. Osteochondral alterations in osteoarthritis. Bone. 2012;51:204–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Burr DB. Anatomy and physiology of the mineralized tissues: role in the pathogenesis of osteoarthrosis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2004;12:S20–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Hayami T, Pickarski M, Zhuo Y, Wesolowski GA, Rodan GA, Duong le T. Characterization of articular cartilage and subchondral bone changes in the rat anterior cruciate ligament transection and meniscectomized models of osteoarthritis. Bone. 2006;38:234–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Bettica P, Cline G, Hart DJ, Meyer J, Spector TD. Evidence for increased bone resorption in patients with progressive knee osteoarthritis: longitudinal results from the Chingford study. Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46:3178–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Hunter DJ, Gerstenfeld L, Bishop G, David AD, Mason ZD, Einhorn TA, et al. Bone marrow lesions from osteoarthritis knees are characterized by sclerotic bone that is less well mineralized. Arthritis Res Ther. 2009;11.Google Scholar
Day JS, Ding M, van der Linden JC, Hvid I, Sumner DR, Weinans H. A decreased subchondral trabecular bone tissue elastic modulus is associated with pre-arthritic cartilage damage. J Orthop Res. 2001;19:914–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Roemer F, Felson DT, Wang K, Crema M, Marra MD, Zhang Y, et al. Co-localization of non-cartilaginous articular pathology and cartilage damage in regard to subsequent cartilage loss in subjects with or at risk for knee osteoarthritis - The most study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:942–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Pelletier JP, Roubille C, Raynauld JP, Abram F, Dorais M, Delorme P, et al. Disease-modifying effect of strontium ranelate in a subset of patients from the Phase III knee osteoarthritis study SEKOIA using quantitative MRI: reduction in bone marrow lesions protects against cartilage loss. Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74:422–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Henriksen M, Christensen R, Hunter DJ, Gudbergsen H, Boesen M, Lohmander LS, et al. Structural changes in the knee during weight loss maintenance after a significant weight loss in obese patients with osteoarthritis: a report of secondary outcome analyses from a randomized controlled trial. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014;22:639–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Kwoh CK, Roemer FW, Hannon MJ, Moore CE, Jakicic JM, Guermazi A, et al. Effect of oral glucosamine on joint structure in individuals with chronic knee pain: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014;66:930–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Miura H, Noguchi Y, Mitsuyasu H, Nagamine R, Urabe K, Matsuda S, et al. Clinical features of multiple epiphyseal dysplasia expressed in the knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;184–90.Google Scholar
Kalichman L, Zhang Y, Niu J, Goggins J, Gale D, Zhu Y, et al. The association between patellar alignment on magnetic resonance imaging and radiographic manifestations of knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2007;9.Google Scholar
Bowes M, Lohmander S, Wolstenholme C, Vincent G, Frobell R. Significant change of bone shape occur over the first five years after acl injury. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21:S220.Google Scholar
Barr ADB, Hensor E, Kingsbury S, Peat G, Sharples L, Bowes M, et al. Three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging knee bone shape predicts total knee replacement: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74:185.Google Scholar
Roemer FW, Neogi T, Nevitt MC, Felson DT, Zhu Y, Zhang Y, et al. Subchondral bone marrow lesions are highly associated with, and predict subchondral bone attrition longitudinally: the MOST study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2010;18:47–53.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Bobinac D, Spanjol J, Zoricic S, Maric I. Changes in articular cartilage and subchondral bone histomorphometry in osteoarthritic knee joints in humans. Bone. 2003;32:284–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Ding M, Odgaard A, Hvid I. Changes in the three-dimensional microstructure of human tibial cancellous bone in early osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85:906–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Li B, Aspden RM. Composition and mechanical properties of cancellous bone from the femoral head of patients with osteoporosis or osteoarthritis. J Bone Miner Res. 1997;12:641–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Phan CM, Link TM, Blumenkrantz G, Dunn TC, Ries MD, Steinbach LS, et al. MR imaging findings in the follow-up of patients with different stages of knee osteoarthritis and the correlation with clinical symptoms. European Radiology. 2006;16:608–18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Kornaat PR, Kloppenburg M, Sharma R, Botha-Scheepers SA, Le MPM, Coene LN, et al. Bone marrow edema-like lesions change in volume in the majority of patients with osteoarthritis; associations with clinical features. European Radiology. 2007;17:3073–8.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
Davies-Tuck ML, Wluka AE, Wang Y, English DR, Giles GG, Cicuttini F. The natural history of bone marrow lesions in community-based adults with no clinical knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68:904–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Laslett LL, Dore DA, Quinn SJ, Boon P, Ryan E, Winzenberg TM, et al. Zoledronic acid reduces knee pain and bone marrow lesions over 1 year: a randomised controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71:1322–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Hunter DJ, Beavers D, Eckstein F, Guermazi A, Loeser RF, Nicklas BJ, et al. The intensive diet and exercise for arthritis trial (IDEA): 18-month radiographic and MRI outcomes. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64:S1070.Google Scholar
Arnoldi CC, Linderholm H, Mussbichler H. Venous engorgement and intraosseous hypertension in osteoarthritis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1972;54:409–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Burr DB. The importance of subchondral bone in the progression of osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol Suppl. 2004;70:77–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Simkin PA. Bone pain and pressure in osteoarthritic joints. Novartis Found Symp. 2004;260:179–86. discussion 86–90, 277–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Hudelmaier M, Wirth W, Nevitt M, Eckstein F. Longitudinal rates of change in subchondral bone size in healthy knees and knees with radiographic osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21:S242.Google Scholar
Felson DT, Niu J, Guermazi A, Roemer F, Aliabadi P, Clancy M, et al. Correlation of the development of knee pain with enlarging bone marrow lesions on magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56:2986–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar

A systematic review of the relationship between subchondral bone features, pain and structural pathology in peripheral joint osteoarthritis

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Systematic review

Systematic literature search

Data extraction

Quality assessment

Best evidence synthesis

Systematic literature search and selection

Data extraction from selected studies

Quality assessment of studies

Relationship between knee bone feature and structural progression

Bone marrow lesions

Osteophytes

Bone attrition

Bone shape/dimension

Bone cyst

Trabecular bone morphometry

Peri-articular bone mineral density

Scintigraphy

2D Knee bone shape

Relationship between knee bone feature and pain

Bone marrow lesions

Osteophytes

Bone attrition

Bone shape/dimension

Bone cyst

2D Knee bone shape

Relationship between hand bone feature and structural progression

Bone marrow lesions

Osteophyte attrition and cysts

Relationship between hand bone feature and pain

Bone marrow lesions

Osteophyte attrition and cysts

Scintigraphy

Relationship between hip bone feature and structural progression

Bone marrow lesions

Trabecular bone morphometry

Peri-articular bone mineral density

2D and 3D hip bone shape

Relationship between hip bone feature and pain

Bone marrow lesions

Bone cyst

Relationship between ankle bone features and structural progression

Scintigraphy

Acknowledgements

Arthritis Research & Therapy

Contact us